Issuu

Grades

Introducing

K–2

Phonemic Awareness and Phonics Toolkit Available January 2022

15 Minutes a Day of systematic and

explicit small-group instruction

Differentiation Support to easily modify lesson instruction to accommodate varying needs

Gradual Release Model

Multi-Sensory Manipulatives

to successfully transfer ownership of learning from teacher to student

to enable students to build lasting connections

For additional information, contact your Dedicated Educational Sales Consultant

Greg Cantone gcantone@hand2mind.com 508.849.7346

Download a Sample Lesson at hand2mind.com/phonics

Literacy Learning Reboot: Embracing a Fresh Perspective Volume 49, Number 2 – December 2021

CO-EDITORS Patricia Crain de Galarce Valerie Harlow Shinas DESIGNER Nadege D. Tessono EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD Marlene Correia Mary Fischer Terrie Marr JoAnn Thompson Nancy Verdolino Nancy Witherell MRA EXECUTIVE BOARD Nancy Witherell, Interim President Leandra Elion, President-Elect Patricia Kelley, Vice President Patricia Crain de Galarce, Vice President-Elect Valerie Harlow Shinas, Immediate Past President Lisa Rice, Treasurer Jennifer Lindsey, Sarah Fennelly, & Mary Wall, Local Council Liaisons For information about MRA and how to become a part of the exciting work, we are doing to promote literacy, visit our website at https://massreading.org/. The MRA Primer is a peer-reviewed journal published annually by the Massachusetts Reading Association. MRA is an affiliate of ILA. Its mission is to promote literacy across the state of Massachusetts.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

The Massachusetts Reading Association Primer Literacy Learning Reboot: Embracing a Fresh Perspective

Letter from the Interim President ……..............................................………………………………………. 5 Nancy Witherell

Letter from the Editors ……………………………….........……................................……………………………….. 6 Patricia Crain de Galarce and Valerie Harlow Shinas

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies ......... 9 Lisa M. O’Brien, Francisca A. Carocca, Bianca Enos, Christine M. Leighton, Emma Caffey

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders ............................................................................................................................................…….. 28 Laurie Higgins and Kathleen Monahan The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers ………………………………..….. 38 Huijing Wen, Joshua Wilson, Dianna Wentzell What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping ……………….. 64 Katie Curran Carr There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the PostPandemic Early Childhood Classroom ……………………...........................................................…….. 76 Kristen Poisson Book Review: We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, by Bettina L. Love ……............................................…………………….. 92 Jonathan A. Harlow

LETTER FROM INTERIM PRESIDENT Dear MRA Members,

Looking out at the fall leaves that just keep falling, especially with the Nor´easter

we experienced, reminds me that often catalysts drive change. In our case, as with most associations, the catalyst has been the pandemic. It has been a challenge for all of us as we learned tech skills we never knew existed, became thrilled as we relied on the vaccine to stop the craziness we are all living in, then the realization that the spread is slowing, but not stopping —and there we find the MRA dilemma. As you know through email, the MRA board, with a lot of thought and sadness, canceled the spring conference. We simply could not take the risk of causing an outbreak of what we all know could be a fatal virus. So, like the leaves on the trees we have been driven to change and exciting changes they are!

The MRA mission is to “promote literacy for all learners through professional

development, research, publications, and advocacy.” We are striving to stand by that mission. Our volunteer editors, Patricia Crain de Galarce and Valerie Shinas, who are overloaded with their own professional workload, have put together this wonderful volume in which other professionals have given time to submit fantastic articles. Our reviewers have taken the time to read and accept these articles. Our Professional Development Committee, with chair Adam Ulenski, is planning to offer PD courses on such topics as racial equity, the science of reading, writing, and hopefully, more on dyslexia. We are in the discussion stages of offering other Zoom events this spring. Our local councils have been busy doing the same. Everyone has been working beyond the Zoom lens!

We hope that the challenges you have faced in the past year have become

easier, and as always, MRA is working to keep you current in all literacy practices. Nancy Witherell Interim President

LETTER FROM THE EDITORS The last year has been quite a year for educators, full of challenges and yet filled with moments of hope. We have learned so much about how to support students, including how to use literature to fill the space between what was and what is now. As we turn the page to 2022, we pause to reflect on the complexities of teaching and learning in such challenging times. This edition of the annual MRA Primer is entitled Literacy Learning Reboot: Embracing a Fresh Perspective. We hope it offers you both a timely selection of scholarship and a vision of inquiry and hope. In the first article, the authors discuss Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies. O’Brien and her colleagues describe a “reimagined” approach to developing students’ literacies as illustrated by three pioneering teachers who were able to draw strategically from the curriculum based on a deep understanding of their students. This message of teaching individual students rather than ‘teaching curriculum’ can also be seen throughout this volume. Higgins and Monahan describe a successful intensive summer literacy program where they developed a deeper understanding of their students. In From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders, the authors share a fresh perspective to learning loss. For the authors, striving readers are those who “simply had not found their literacy toolkit yet”. This view allowed them to describe emergent readers using an asset-based lens. Finding one’s literacy toolkit and the teaching of reading are both art and science. The pre-service teachers described by Wen, Wilson, and Wentzel learned to teach reading through supported practice and reflection. In the article, The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers, the authors share experiences that support the development of a nuanced craft, teacher voice, and pedagogical understanding. Similarly, Carr reflects on her clinical experiences working with students as she wonders why she never learned the important tool of orthographic mapping. As a reading specialist, Carr designs professional development opportunities for teachers 6

that connect theory and practice. In What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping, she describes the ways she introduced teachers to the neurological processes of automaticity that support reading and spelling. This understanding, alongside word-study practices, served to reinvigorate teachers. Like previous authors, Carr suggests that a combination of theory and practice allows teachers to “make more clearly informed decisions about how their literacy instruction is choreographed”. Intentionally selecting the right texts for readers is another key teacher move that can serve students and families well and helps to create a safe and supportive classroom. Poisson rebooted after the disruption of the pandemic and shares how “coupling literacy with social-emotional learning became a wonderful way for staff to ease fears and anxiety and bring students together.” In There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom, the author offers suggestions for texts and their potential use in social and emotional learning. Poisson beautifully describes the ways that literature can be used to create learning environments that meet the needs of “our youngest learners, particularly in times of unrest”. To conclude this edition of the Primer, is the inspiration for our individual reboots. Abolitionist teacher Jonathan Harlow concludes this edition of the Primer with a review of Love’s important book, We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom. Bettina L. Love urges us to imagine beyond compliance and eliminate the educational survival complex for all our students. At this moment, when teacher expertise and critical race theory is under attack, we hope this reading bolters confidence for every antiracist educator. We are grateful for the authors of this edition who continue to inspire, question, and share fresh perspectives. The following collection of peer-reviewed articles offers hope for transformative teaching, equitable schools, thriving readers, and uninhibited learners. We hope you will enjoy reading. Yours in literacy, Patricia Crain de Galarce, Ed.D. Valerie Harlow Shinas, Ph.D. Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

How Superkids Instruction Reflects the SCIENCE of READING

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies Lisa M. O’Brien Education Department, Winston School of Education and Social Policy, Merrimack College, North Andover, MA Francisca A. Carocca Fifth Grade Bilingual Teacher, Waltham Public Schools, Waltham, MA Bianca Enos Kindergarten Teacher, Haverhill Public Schools, Haverhill, NH Christine M. Leighton School of Education, Emmanuel College, Boston, MA Emma Caffey Second Grade Teacher, Mission Grammar School, Boston, MA

Ms. Nhan (pseudonym), a third grade, sheltered-English immersion [SEI] teacher in

a northeastern urban school) participated in a semester-long professional development initiative, Reading and Writing Instruction for the 21st Century (RWIC), to learn about innovative and effective ways to support her students’ literacy development. As part of this work, Ms. Nhan reviewed the district-mandated curriculum and required text. She noted that lesson goals for the upcoming week included identifying the main idea and retelling key ideas from the informational text Face to Face With Wolves (Brandenburg & Brandenburg, 2018). Below is a text excerpt:

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Wolf families are called packs. The pack consists of a mother and father, called the alpha pair, and their offspring. The alpha female and alpha male are the leaders of the pack. The pups usually stay with the pack for two or three years. When they are grown, one of them might become pack leader--or the alpha pair might drive them away. They then become lone wolves, who may someday join with the other lone wolves to mate and form new packs (p. 6). As Ms. Nhan read the text and thought of her students, she wondered questions such as: How do I support my students while adhering to the curriculum? How do I help my students understand complex vocabulary (e.g., leader, pack, alpha) while they are also developing English? How do I help my students who struggle to read with fluency and understanding? How do I balance supporting access to digital and non-digital text with building foundational literacy skills?

Ms. Nhan’s questions highlight the diversity we see in today’s classrooms;

students in today’s classroom are of varying cultural, linguistic, academic, and economic backgrounds. Her questions also remind us of the pressing need to support all students’ literacy development and the challenges teachers face in doing so. Although longstanding evidence indicates that one-size-fits-all approaches to instruction do not effectively support all students (e.g., Connor et al., 2011), the use of standardized curricula (i.e., mandated, narrow, and prescribed curriculum) is widespread (Sleeter, 2012). Moreover, in districts wherein standardized curricula are mandated, teachers often find themselves challenged to adapt or modify instruction for their particular classroom context without violating such mandates (e.g., Crocco & Costigan, 2007; Flores, 2007).

A northeastern, urban school district invited us (a northeastern college) to support

teachers in implementing a recently adopted literacy curriculum. With RWIC, we set out to help teachers (1) deepen their understanding of evidence-based literacy instruction (with digital and non-digital, print-based text) and (2) act on that understanding to develop their students’ literacy abilities as they implemented the district-mandated curriculum.

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

Early on, however, it became clear that teachers were overwhelmed and frustrated by the curriculum. This feedback led us to focus on empowering teachers to “reimagine” their literacy curriculum and instruction. Specifically, we emphasized drawing strategically from the curriculum based on teachers’ growing expertise and understanding of their students as we concurrently supported a deeper understanding of evidence-based literacy instruction. In this article, our purpose is to describe (1) a “reimagined” approach to developing students’ literacies that emerged from our work with teachers and (2) how three teachers wove this approach into their classrooms. Reimagining Development of Literacies

To thrive in the 21st century, students must be able to navigate myriad digital

and non-digital texts. To do so requires that students develop literacies. That is, students must develop the skills and knowledge needed to understand, critically evaluate, and communicate with non-digital and digital text (Baker, 2020). Although there is overlap in the knowledge and skills that underlie literacy proficiency with non-digital and digital text (e.g., word recognition, vocabulary, comprehension), skillful reading of digital texts requires some unique skills and strategies, such as online comprehension strategies (Coiro, 2011) and understanding audience when composing non-digital and digital texts (Baker, 2020).

There is an abundance of evidence-based frameworks and approaches targeting

different aspects related to the development of literacies. However, identifying which approaches to draw from and how different approaches can be woven together to fully address the development of literacies can be a daunting task. In turn, many teachers turn to resources that vary widely in efficacy, such as Pinterest and Teachers Pay Teachers (Opfer et al., 2016). As such, we identified and tied together five evidence-based approaches into a single framework—Integrated Literacies Framework (ILF)—focused on building students’ literacies. These included Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction ([CORI] Guthrie et al. 2007), flexible grouping (Paratore, 2000), close reading (e.g., Fisher & Frey 2012), scaffolded repeated readings (Kuhn et al., 2006), and leveraging multimodal

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

text sets (O’Brien et al., 2018). Across RWIC, we worked with teachers to understand how to use this framework to guide their implementation of the district curriculum.

In the following sections, we first discuss the five approaches and their importance

to developing students’ literacies. Then, we describe ILF. Finally, we share how teachers who participated in RWIC were empowered to act on their growing knowledge—i.e., the various ways three teachers brought this work into their classrooms. Evidence-Based Approaches

Concept-oriented reading instruction. Grounded in the evidence of strong links

between reading engagement and reading achievement (Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000), CORI is an approach that joins instructional practices that foster reading motivation and engagement and comprehension strategy instruction (Guthrie, Wigfield, & You, 2012). Guthrie and his colleagues explain that fostering reading engagement is important because engaged readers are motivated to read and pursue knowledge and are strategic and persistent when working through challenges when reading. Both persisting with challenging reading tasks and building knowledge are key to developing reading competency.

CORI instruction includes a cluster of practices that, when well-integrated,

enhances students’ reading motivation, engagement, and comprehension outcomes (for a review, see Guthrie et al., 2007). These practices include supporting relevance, using thematic units, collaborating with peers, and providing student choice. Teachers create interest and motivation by making learning relevant. For example, teachers may help students connect curricular content with their lived experiences or provide an authentic purpose for engaging in a unit of study. To support learning goals, teachers create thematic units through three key practices: (a) framing a unit of study with a knowledge goal (i.e., a key content theme or concept such as How do animals adapt to meet their needs and survive?), (b) students read a collection of topically related texts that provide a context for developing reading proficiency (e.g., comprehension strategies) and support

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

learning about the knowledge goal, and (c) students communicate new understandings (e.g., composing a written report). To support learning as a social practice, teachers strategically draw from a repertoire of collaborative practices. These can take many forms, including whole group teacher and student discussion, partner discussion (e.g., turn and talks, paired readings), and structured small group discussion (e.g., jigsaw, literature circles, idea circles). Finally, to share control of learning with students, teachers provide students choices in various ways such as choice of texts, response format, sequence of activities, or partners.

Flexible grouping. Flexible grouping is a powerful way to provide all students

targeted instruction and equitable opportunities for learning (Hoffman, 2002). One flexible grouping model, developed by Paratore (2000), is particularly useful as it affords students access to complex text while also building foundational skills such as word recognition and fluency. Paratore’s flexible grouping model comprises three types of reading events: Community Reading, Just Right Reading, and On-Your-Own Reading. The goal of Community Reading is to support students’ acquisition of grade-level vocabulary, concepts, and language structures and build community. To do so, the teacher mediates all students’ access to complex, curriculum-driven, grade-appropriate text using explicit teaching, such as explanation, demonstration, guided practice, and independent practice (Pearson & Gallagher, 1983). To meet students’ varying needs, the teacher also uses a combination of grouping structures (e.g., whole group, small group). A Community Reading lesson begins with whole group instruction focused on what all students need to access a text. This often includes activating and building background knowledge, pre-teaching important vocabulary, reading aloud the text while explaining and demonstrating key skills and strategies. Next, students work in needs-based groups. Students who need substantial support to access the text work in a small group with the teacher while she employs various strategies (e.g., echo read, choral read, vocabulary instruction) to support text access and understanding. Other students read the text with a partner or independently, often completing a graphic organizer to scaffold their understanding. Finally, the teacher meets with students in a whole-class format to

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

discuss, summarize, and co-construct a deeper understanding of the text, focal skills, and strategies, or to facilitate the structured small-group discussion (e.g., literature circles).

Although text comprehension is also important with Just Right Reading, a key

purpose of this reading event is to build students’ word recognition and fluency. To do so, students meet with the teacher in small needs-based groups, reading text at their instructional level (i.e., texts students can read with at least 90% word reading accuracy). For students whose instructional level is “below-grade-level,” the teacher may have the group read a central book, engage students in a targeted word study activity, and reread a text to build fluency. For students whose instructional level is “on” or “above-gradelevel,” the teacher may provide students with comprehension or decoding strategies or may challenge them with texts that stretch beyond their reading level. Finally, On-Your-Own reading is a student-driven time of day during which students independently read any book of their choice. This reading event is meant to provide students with motivation and choice in their reading endeavors. In order to ensure that students are engaged and benefiting from their independent reading, it is vital that teachers provide students with reading material that suits their interests and reading levels, structured and predictable independent reading time, and interventions when motivation or comprehension support is required (Kelley, Clausen-Grace, 2009-2010).

Close reading. Close reading is an instructional routine wherein students

critically examine a text while also developing the habits of skilled readers (i.e., stamina and persistence) as they interact with short, complex text (Fisher & Frey 2012). This is generally accomplished through repeated readings with each reading affording students the opportunity to deepen their understanding. With each reading, guiding questions are used to support extended, collaborative discussion and co-construction of deep understanding. Questions progress from literal (i.e., What does the text say?), to structural (i.e., How does the text work?) to inferential (i.e., What does the text mean?) focused questions (Fisher & Frey, 2015). In this process, text annotation (i.e., reading and marking

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

up a text to note elements such as key ideas and confusions) is also used to support critical analysis of the text.

Fisher and Frey (2015) explain that although close reading is a useful way to

help students develop comprehension proficiency and deeper understanding, they acknowledge that it is not a complete literacy instructional framework. Rather, close reading is intended to be part of a more comprehensive evidence-based literacy instructional framework, in which students apply what they learn (e.g., word recognition, fluency) as they close read. Because of this, as Snow and O’Connor (2016) tell us, it is important that students are provided instruction that allows them to be successful with close reading. For example, to critically examine text, students must hold sufficient background knowledge so that they can evaluate the trustworthiness of texts closely read. As such, building text-relevant background knowledge must be part of students’ instructional experiences. Without instruction that builds such knowledge, students may assume that all texts read are the only legitimate evidence sources.

Scaffolded repeated readings. Developing reading fluency is key in building

students’ reading proficiency as doing so enables students to devote their cognitive resources to meaning construction as opposed to decoding text (Kuhn, 2006). Although fluency instruction is a mainstay in many classrooms, the focus is limited--addressing a partial representation of fluency (i.e., accuracy and automaticity) and is framed as the end of instruction rather than a skill that, in part, enables comprehension (Kuhn, 2018). Scaffolded repeated readings are grounded in the Kuhn et al. (2010) definition of reading fluency: Fluency combines accuracy, automaticity, and oral reading prosody, which taken together, facilitate the reader’s construction of meaning. It is demonstrated during oral reading through ease of word recognition, appropriate pacing, phrasing, and intonation. It is a factor in both oral and silent reading that can limit or support comprehension (p. 240).

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

In addition to attending to the full construct of fluency, repeated exposure to

words across multiple contexts is a key way to build students’ fluency. The use of scaffolded repeated readings in which students assume increasing control of their reading and fluency is an effective way to build all components of reading fluency (e.g., Kuhn et al. 2006). Scaffolded repeated reading practices fall along a continuum from teacher read-alouds, echo reading, choral reading, partner reading, to independent reading. With each successive reading, students progress along the continuum while the teacher also supports comprehension. For example, the first reading of a text may be a read-aloud, followed by echo reading, and then choral reading. By following this continuum of rereading, with teacher guidance for deeper understanding, students are provided scaffolding that fades to support their developing fluency while also building comprehension. Importantly, Kuhn (2018) tells us that fluency instruction alone is not a complete literacy program. Instead, fluency instruction should be part of reading development with the ultimate goal of acquiring knowledge from a wide variety of texts.

Leveraging multimodal text sets. Rapid technological advances have led to a

major shift in the primary format for reading, from non-digital to digital texts (Campano et al., 2020). For example, by age 6, 85% of children use technology in some way (Erikson Institute, 2016), and by age 11, 53% of children own a smartphone (Rideout & Robb, 2019). As such, scholars argue that views of technology must shift from a distant to an integral part of children’s school experiences (e.g., Marsh, 2005). Doing so represents one important way to connect students’ literacy practices inside and outside the school (e.g., Hutchinson & Henry, 2010). Yet, in many classrooms, non-digital forms of literacy are more highly valued and recognized (Aberg & Aferfeldt, 2017).

Thus, it is important for teachers to broaden their view of literacy beyond the

printed text (e.g., Jewitt, 2008; Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001) and weave digital texts in their literacy instruction. One way to do so is to meaningfully leverage multimodal text sets. As O’Brien et al. (2018) explain, “incorporating multimodal text sets—sets of topicallycoherent texts (digital and non-digital) that convey information through multiple modes

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

(e.g., print, sound, images, animation)—into the instructional context in meaningful and authentic ways affords students opportunities for home, school, and social connections and responds to 21st-century learning needs” (p. 124). Teachers who meaningfully leverage multimodal text sets assemble high-quality, topically coherent digital and non-digital texts that are used during literacy instruction. This instruction emphasizes the acquisition of the integrated literacies skills and strategies (e.g., decoding images and words, comprehension strategies such as locating information and summarizing, understanding the audience when composing a digital and non-digital text) that allow students to build knowledge and communicate. The Integrated Literacies Framework

As we worked with teachers to develop ILF, we were guided by questions such

as: What aspects of the curriculum will help my students build required skills and knowledge? What aspects do I need to modify or add? or What instructional routines are essential (e.g., grouping practices, explicit teaching)? With such questions in mind, we drew from the aforementioned approaches to construct ILF.

As with CORI, a knowledge goal frames a unit of study and topically related text

sets were assembled to provide a context for learning about the knowledge goal and developing literacy skills. To incorporate digital text, ILF encouraged multimodal text sets. Skills needed to access texts (digital and non-digital) and learn about the knowledge goal were identified. Based on Paratore’s (2000) flexible grouping model, ILF comprised three types of reading events: Community Reading, Just Right Reading, and On-YourOwn Reading. Because teachers felt confident with self-selected, independent reading, in RWIC we only focused on Community Reading and Just Right Reading. Aspects of Close Reading, Scaffolded Repeated Reading, and CORI were embedded within these two types of reading events as described below. Both Community Reading and Just Right Reading comprised three segments. During Get Ready to Read, teachers targeted what was essential to help all students read

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

the focal text (e.g., activate background knowledge, pre-teach important vocabulary). In Guide Reading and Discuss, teachers provided targeted instruction to support fluency and understanding. Finally, during Reflect, Connect, and Extend, teachers guided students in recalling and deepening understanding. Although Community Reading and Just Right Reading included the same segments, the focus of each reading event varied. As Paratore (2000) explains, Community Reading focused on supporting access to complex text to support equitable opportunities to build knowledge. Close Reading and Scaffolded Repeated Reading were strategically embedded within Community Reading reading events to support the needs of students with differing learning profiles. During Get Ready to Read, the teacher provided wholeclass instruction that all students needed (e.g., activating background knowledge, preteaching important vocabulary, reading aloud the text to teach a comprehension strategy, or reading for the gist--a close reading practice). A concept map portraying key concepts related to the knowledge goal was introduced to provide a context for documenting students’ growing understanding across the unit. Digital texts such as videos or images were often incorporated to make learning relevant and build background knowledge. Next, during Guide and Discuss, to support fluency, students reread the text in small needsbased groups—with the teacher, partners, or individually; however, scaffolded repeated readings and guiding questions were strategically used to support fluent reading. For example, students who needed a lot of support might have worked with the teacher to echo read and then choral read a text while working on a graphic organizer; at the same time, students who needed some support might have had a partner read while working on a graphic organizer and then independently read to add any new information to the graphic organizer. Finally, during Reflect, Connect, and Extend, the teacher supported summarizing and connecting what students learned to prior learning and/or the world through practices such as whole group discussion, partner discussion (e.g. “turn and talk”), adding onto the concept map, composing a response with digital (e.g., blog post, Flipgrid video) or non-digital text (e.g., written response). The collaborative nature of a

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

Community Reading event aligns with CORI’s concept of collaboration. See Figure 1 for an example of a concept map and see Figure 2 for an example of a Community Reading lesson plan for a fifth-grade classroom.

Figure 1: Concept Map for a Fifth Grade Classroom

Figure 2: Community Reading Lesson Plan for a Fifth Grade Classroom

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Just Right Reading in ILF also provides opportunities for learning related to

the knowledge goal as students read text with content related to the knowledge goal. However, Just Right Reading emphasizes building word recognition and fluency. To do so, the texts students read differ; students read a text they can read with at least 85% accuracy. We encouraged 85% word reading accuracy (instead of 90% accuracy that is widely used) based on findings showing that students who struggle make accelerated growth with effective instruction when reading text they can read with at least 85% accuracy (e.g., Kuhn et al., 2006; Morgan et al., 2000). To support word recognition, in Get Ready to Read, the teacher set the purpose for reading as learning about the knowledge goal and developing word recognition. Many teachers encouraged students to make a prediction related to the knowledge goal (e.g., What do you think we will discover about new technologies in the text?). To support phonics knowledge, the teacher guided students with a brief word study activity (e.g., word sort, making words) that targeted their particular word recognition needs. In Guide and Discuss, the teacher coached word recognition as students whisper read the text. The teacher also posed questions that helped students think about the knowledge goal (e.g., What does __ tell us about __?). Finally, During Connect, Reflect, and Extend, the teacher briefly guided students in recapping and connecting to prior reading or life experiences. The teacher might have decided to reteach or reinforce some aspect of word recognition that she noticed students would benefit from as they read. See Figure 3 for an example of a Just Right Reading lesson plan for a fifth-grade classroom.

“Teachers who meaningfully leverage multimodal text sets assemble high-quality, topically coherent digital and non-digital texts that are used during literacy instruction”.

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

Figure 3: Just Right Reading Lesson Plan for a Fifth Grade Classroom

Empowering Teachers

To help teachers decide how to draw from ILF as they implemented the district-

mandated curriculum, we reviewed the curricular structure and goals, resources, and lesson plans. The curriculum included a collection of units for grade level, with each unit, focused on two to three guiding questions representing big ideas in the unit (e.g., What are human rights? What lessons can we learn about human rights through literature and life? How can we tell powerful stories about people’s experiences?). Each unit comprised text sets intended for the whole class with lessons to support the acquisition of literacy skills (e.g., identifying the main idea, making inferences, using context clues to determine the meaning of words) and learning related to the guiding question. Individual 60-minute lessons included three primary segments with numerous activities within each segment. During the Opening lesson segment, homework was reviewed and discussed in small groups. The Work Time lesson segment generally focused on 3-4 types of tasks. These included reviewing and discussing the group work norms (i.e., procedures and rules for working in groups.) and reading a complex text two to three times (e.g., once for the “gist,” once to practice several literacy skills, and once for vocabulary instruction). During

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

this time, the teacher circulated to assess workgroup norms and provide support. The final lesson segment, Closing and Assessment, focused on students sharing and recapping their understanding. The teacher also explained the procedures for that day’s homework. Lessons were very detailed, focused on telling students what to do and what teachers should “look for” in students’ responses and work. Absent were teaching actions focused on explaining, demonstrating, and guiding students in acquiring the focal literacy skills and strategies like explicit teaching. Moreover, at the time of RWIC, the curriculum did not provide any lessons that directly supported word recognition development for students. For example, a lesson focused on identifying the main idea and summary writing opened with directing students to discuss the aforementioned goals in small groups. Next, students were “cold called” (i.e., directing a student to respond or share their thinking as opposed to inviting the student to volunteer a response) and directed to explain what the following words mean: determine, main idea, identifying, supporting details, summarizing while the teacher listens for particular responses (e.g., identifying means to find out). Then, students were instructed to read to find the main idea. The lesson continued in a similar fashion and ended with cold calling students to share their summaries. At the start of RWIC, teachers’ reported feeling pressure to complete every task in the lessons while maintaining the districts’ pacing calendar but were unable to do so. As such, they often would spend 2-3 days on a single lesson in order to fully teach the lesson and address students’ needs.

As previously mentioned, ILF emerged from helping teachers implement evidence-

based literacy instruction while also adhering to the mandated curriculum. This included making informed instructional decisions--that is, drawing from an understanding of evidence-based literacy practice and their students to strategically select elements of curriculum and add key teaching actions (e.g., explicit instruction) and instructional content (e.g., word study) that were not part of the curriculum. Below we share how lessons evolved for three teachers: Diane, Lieke, and Marrisa, as they participated in RWIC. This includes lesson plans they crafted as well as our direct observations of instruction they provided during their final week of RWIC. Specifically, we describe shifts in teachers’ use

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

of grouping practices, scaffolded repeated reading, digital texts, explicit instruction (e.g., explain, demonstrate, guide), and practices that promote student engagement.

Diane. Initially, Diane planned lessons that provided some guidance to students

and included the use of tools to scaffold their learning, although these tools were nondigital. Her initial plan did not include other key aspects of explicit instruction (e.g., explain, demonstrate) or scaffolded repeated reading, engagement, and grouping practices. In her final lesson plan, she continued to guide but also included demonstration as part of the process. Moreover, she grouped students based on needs to provide more targeted instruction, and this included use of scaffolded repeated reading practices, digital texts (e.g., video), and practices that promote student engagement. Also notable is that Diane revised the ILF planning template to create her own (e.g., revised “Instructional Decisions” to “Instructional Choices,” added “What videos will be helpful?” [See Figure 4]). In our observations of Diane’s teaching, we observed many of the practices she included in her plan, as well as some that were not in the plan (e.g., explaining paired with demonstration). However, some elements of ILF were not well-integrated into the district curriculum (e.g., The curriculum focus of finding facts was separate from fluency scaffolds--i.e., scaffolded repeated readings.) and at times, slow pacing led to student distraction.

“We hope that Integrated Literacies Framework (ILF) provides teachers and literacy coaches with useful tools as they move towards addressing the full range of literacies students need to develop in this 21st century.”

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

Lieke. Lieke, a third-grade SEI teacher (previously described as Ms. Nahn)

closely worked with Diane, as they generally co-planned. Her first plan included some explanation but no other aspects of explicit instruction, which is consistent with the district curriculum. Moreover, she included the use of non-digital scaffolding tools but did not make use of scaffolded repeated reading practices. Unlike Diane, however, she also included an engagement practice. Similar to Diane, with her final plan, she included more features of explicit instruction (i.e., demonstrate and guide) and grouped students by need using scaffolded repeated reading practices. She also revised the ILF planning template in the same way Diane did. In addition, as with Leike, we observed many of the practices she included in her plan as well as some that were not in the plan (e.g., use of video to support vocabulary learning and discussion, engagement practices). Finally, also similar to Diane, scaffolded repeated readings were not well-integrated into the district curriculum. Marissa. Marissa, a fourth-grade inclusion teacher, also demonstrated some shifts in her instruction. Teaching actions for her first plan were primarily focused on providing guidance. She tended to keep students together as a whole class, providing guidance to help all students progress at the same pace. However, in her final lesson plan, she expanded to include all elements of explicit teaching, scaffolding tools including the use of digital texts, and use of grouping and engagement practices. Marissa’s shifts suggest she moved away from a one-size-fits-all approach as evidenced by her use of guided whole-class instruction to more targeted instruction as evidenced by her use of grouping practices and other aspects of explicit instruction (e.g., explain, demonstrate). Concluding Thoughts

Collectively, the ways teachers’ lessons evolved suggest that ILF (paired with

participation in RWIC) empowered teachers to modify the district curriculum in ways that better aligned with evidence-based instruction. Although the ways in which each teacher drew from ILF varied, there were some important changes in teaching practices across teachers. First, all teachers wove digital texts into their curriculum--this represents

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

an important shift as the use of digital texts is a key way towards building students’ literacies. Moreover, all moved towards more targeted, needs-based instruction. Given the pervasiveness and ineffectiveness of one-size-fits-all approaches, this again is an important shift. As Baker (2020) reminds us, excellent teaching does not ignore but rather attends to the “magnificent variability” of students. Notably, two teachers “picked up” ILF and adapted the planning template for their classrooms, suggesting further that teachers became empowered to make the template their own. While the ways teachers’ instruction evolved is encouraging and suggests ILF holds promise in helping teachers build their students’ literacies, some teachers’ difficulty weaving ILF into their curriculum underscores the complex nature of building teacher knowledge. That said, we hope that ILF provides teachers and literacy coaches with useful tools as they move towards addressing the full range of literacies students need to develop in this 21st century. References Aberg, E. S. & Akerfeldt, A. (2017). Design and recognition of multimodal texts: Selection of digital tools and modes on the basis of social materials and premises. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(3), 283-306. Baker, E. A. (2020, December). Wag the dog: A digital literacies narrative. [Presidential address]. Literacy Research Association. https://www.literacyresearchassociation.org/past-conferences Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the Internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of literacy research, 43(4), 352-392. Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Fishman, B., Giuliani, S., Luck, M., Underwood, P. S., ... & Schatschneider, C. (2011). Testing the impact of child characteristics× instruction interactions on third graders’ reading comprehension by differentiating literacy instruction. Reading research quarterly, 46(3), 189-221. Crocco, M. S., & Costigan, A. T. (2007). The narrowing of curriculum and pedagogy in the age of accountability. Urban Education, 42, 512-535. Erikson Institute. (2016). Technology and young children in the digital age: A report from the Erikson Institute. Retrieved 1/26/20 from https://www.erikson.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/EriksonInstitute-Technology-and-Young-Children-Survey.pdf Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Close Reading in Elementary Schools. The Reading Teacher, 66(3), 179-188. DOI:10.1002/TRTR.01117. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2015). Improve reading with complex texts. Kappan Magazine, 96(5). Flores, M. T. (2007). Navigating contradictory communities of practice in learning to teach for social justice. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 38(4), 380-404. Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S., L. (2007). Contributions of concept-oriented reading instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42 (4), 237250.

Empowering Teachers to Reimagine Instruction that Builds Students’ Literacies

Guthrie, J. T. & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.) Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403-422). Hoffman, J., (2002). Flexible Grouping Strategies in the Multiage Classroom. Theory Into Practice, Winter, 2002, Vol. 41, No. 1, 47-52. Hutchison, A., & Henry, L. ( 2010 ). Internet use and online reading among middle-grade students at risk of dropping out of school. Middle Grades Research Journal, 5 ( 2 ). Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32, 241–267. Kelley, M. J., Clausen-Grace, N. (2009-2010). Facilitating engagement by differentiating independent reading. The Reading Teacher, 63(4), 313–318 Kress, G. , & Van Leeuwen , T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Oxford University Press. Kuhn, M. R., (2005). A Comparative Study of Small Group Fluency Instruction. Reading Psychology, 26: 127-146. Kuhn, M. R., Rasinski, T., Young, C., (2018). Best Practices in Fluency Instruction. Best Practices in Literacy Instruction, 272-288. Kuhn, M. R., Schwanenflugel, P. J., Meisinger, E. B. (2010). Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Automaticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading Research Quarterly, 45 (2), 230-251. Marsh, J. (2005). Digikids: Young children, popular culture and media. Critical Issues in Early Childhood Education, 181-196. Morgan, A., Wilcox, B. R., & Eldredge, J. L. (2000). Effect of difficulty levels on second-grade delayed readers using dyad reading. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 113-119. O’Brien, L. M., Salinas, A., Reinhart, K. & Paratore. J. R., (2018). Preservice Teachers’ Use of Technology and Multimodal Text Sets in Teaching Reading: Lessons Learned from a Design-Based Study. In E. Ortlieb, E. H. Cheek, & P. Semingson (Eds.) Best Practices in Teaching Digital Literacies, pp. 123136. Emerald Publishing. Opfer, V. D., Kaufman, J. H., & Thompson, L. E. (2016). Implementation of K–12 state standards for mathematics and English language arts and literacy. RAND. Paratore, J. R., (2000). Grouping for Instruction in Literacy: What We’ve Learned About What Works and What Doesn’t. The California Reader, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 2-10. Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, G. (1983). The gradual release of responsibility model of instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 112-123. Rideout, V., and Robb, M. B. (2019). The Common Sense census: Media use by tweens and teens, 2019. CommonSense Media. Sleeter, C. E. (2012). Confronting the marginalization of culturally responsive pedagogy. Urban Education, 47(3), 562-584. Snow, C. & O’Connor, C. (2016). Close Reading and Far-Reaching Classroom Discussion: Fostering a Vital Connection. Journal of Education, 196(1), 1-8.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2 December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders Laurie Higgins Reading Resource, Wilkins Elementary School, Stoughton, MA Kathleen Monahan Principal, Wilkins Elementary School, Stoughton, MA

Educators want to fix things. We are constantly analyzing problems and thinking

about the best ways to solve them. When faced with the statistics coming out of the pandemic year, we are overwhelmed with what can be perceived as “problems.” We have been bombarded with stories of “learning loss,” and no one understands this better than teachers. But what if we shifted our thinking from that of loss to opportunity; from that of deficit to growth? That’s exactly what we did at the Richard L. Wilkins Elementary School in Stoughton, MA, and it worked! Background

The Covid-19 pandemic required educators nationwide to change their approach

to education. In an instant, schools were shut down, and education, as we knew it, changed overnight in March of 2020. Districts scrambled to determine the best ways to educate their students, but admittedly student and staff health and safety took priority. As the summer of 2020 approached, districts were tasked with creating educational plans for numerous scenarios. With Covid-19 still greatly impacting most communities, these

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders

plans were ever-changing and fluid. Stoughton Public Schools created three distinct educational plans: a full in-person plan, a hybrid plan, and a full remote plan. As the fall of 2020 approached, it was decided that the district would implement the hybrid plan with a fully remote option. Families at the elementary level who opted to participate in the hybrid plan would have students in school two days a week and home for three days a week. This plan evolved as the year progressed, eventually adding an additional school day each week for students and encouraging the most at-risk students to attend school full time. In April of 2021, all students enrolled in the hybrid plan returned to school fully in person for the remainder of the school year. At the Richard L. Wilkins Elementary School, approximately 70% of the enrolled students opted into the hybrid plan, with the remaining 30% choosing to learn remotely. These percentages did not vary significantly during the course of the school year, even as the plans evolved. Rationale

Like so many of the schools in the Commonwealth, based on the winter benchmark

data for reading readiness, it was determined that there was significant loss-of-learning for many of our rising second graders. During the 2020-2021 academic year, none of the first-grade students at the Richard L. Wilkins Elementary School had the opportunity to attend school in person for more than their assigned cohort days due to high enrollment and social distancing requirements. Additionally, like all other students in Massachusetts, all of the students were completely remote as of March 13, 2020, therefore missing key opportunities in kindergarten for building the necessary foundational skills required for reading. It should also be noted that 15 first-grade students were level 1 ELL. Because of the cohort model, these students had limited opportunities to practice English because of their reduced time in school. While efforts were made to remediate the loss of learning, progress was less than expected. Our district uses Scholastic’s Next Step Guided Reading Assessment (NSGRA) to measure students’ reading fluency and comprehension. Students are assigned a letter for guided reading leveling purposes. Each grade level has a band of levels that typical students read in during the course of a school year, with benchmark goals set throughout the year. As of the winter benchmark data, of the 49 first

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

grade students, only 14 were reading at or above grade level (NSGRA level G-L). Of the remaining students, 28 students are reading at a level C or below. It should be noted that students exiting kindergarten should be reading at an NSGRA level of D.

We were obviously faced with a very real “problem”, and our “solve-it” mentality

kicked into overdrive. How were we going to help remediate loss-of-learning for these first-grade students and prepare them for second grade? For us, the solution was simple; stop thinking of these rising students in terms of their loss of learning. These students had not lost anything, and they simply had not found their literacy tool kit yet.

When reviewing the data, it was apparent that these students were making

significant progress once they returned full time in April. Their progression was just cut short due to the quickly approaching summer vacation. We found ourselves saying things like, “if only we had more time, a few more weeks…”. In these conversations, the solution became clear: we needed to run a five-week summer reading program where students would attend four days a week (Monday - Thursday), starting at the beginning of July and ending in August. At this time, we were confident that we could close some gaps and help these students feel better prepared for second grade! The Program

The program was designed in a very thoughtful and deliberate way. In order

to build off of the existing knowledge that the students already had, we wanted to use curricula that the students were familiar with while exposing them to strategies that would allow them to progress along the continuum of reading. Therefore, lessons were chosen from our existing phonics and English Language Arts curricula. The district currently uses Wilson Fundations as our phonics curriculum for grades k-3. We also used Lucy Calkins’ Units of Study for Reading and Writing within our English Language Arts curriculum.

Students were placed in groups of no more than ten students, and the program

was staffed by two certified classroom teachers and one certified reading teacher. The

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders

summer staff met at the end of the school year to review the data. Based on this analysis, an intentional plan was developed that included an hour of phonics instruction, phonemic awareness activities, reading fluency, writing, and reading comprehension (Table 1). Students would get explicit, direct instruction in phonological skill remediation, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. Each day began with a soft start. Working together, students played “I Spy” with high-frequency words, constructed and deconstructed words, and went on a story walk. The soft-start was not only a way to ease students into their new day but also engaged students in filling their toolbox from the very start.

The groups were fluid and initially based on end-of-year benchmark data. Each

group rotated through three sessions each day, each one devoted to phonics, reading workshop, or fluency. Students had access to texts appropriately leveled with increasing complexity, and they were able to take these books home for additional practice for the duration of the program. The students were set up to transfer the skills and strategies learned from each group to the authentic texts they were reading. Additionally, students were furnished with a collection of books at their level to take home at the conclusion of the program.

Students have become familiar with the structure and routines of the workshop,

and it was important for us to build upon the momentum that had already been established during the school year. When rotating through the Reading Workshop portion of their day, students participated in a daily mini-lesson and developed a co-created anchor chart for each strategy taught. Much of this hour was dedicated to partner and independent reading. During this time, the teacher conferred with students and pulled small strategy groups. A group share rounded out the time and reinforced the strategies students were adding to their toolbox.

When students were working with a teacher on phonics, emphasis was placed on

reviewing phonics concepts from first grade. It was determined that while these concepts were taught during the year, based on a student’s circumstances, gaps in understanding

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

were present for many of the students invited to participate in this program. In reviewing concepts taught earlier in the year, it was found that the students were met with success, gained more confidence in their ability to decode, and showed mastery of skills of which they had previously only been familiar.

The final rotation was initially conceptualized as a time for students to improve their

sight word recognition and fluency. While this remained a focus throughout the program, handwriting and writing skills were quickly integrated into this time block. Here, students were tasked with identifying sight words and using them in authentic writing pieces.

Data analysis continued to be an important part of this program. It was important

for us to be able to determine the effectiveness of our program so that we could make any necessary adjustments for future implementation. Therefore, pre and post-NSGRA assessments were administered for each student to accurately assess individual needs as well as growth. A Glimpse into the Classroom “My teacher has that book in our classroom!” “I love that book!” “I know Jabari!”

These were some of the chants heard as the rising second-grade students settled

into the reading workshop portion of the program. Each day, the students spent an hour adding new reading strategies to their ever-growing toolbox. The lessons began with a mini-lesson that incorporated an interactive read-aloud. The read-aloud served as the anchor to the mini-lesson. However, as all good read alouds, it also promoted vocabulary and stimulated curiosity. As educators, we understand the power of a daily interactive read-aloud. Wiley Blevins (2020), author of many books on teaching phonics and word study, has stated that reading aloud builds vocabulary and content knowledge. “These read-alouds must involve interactive conversations to engage students in thinking about the content and using the vocabulary.” “Too often, when time is limited, the daily read-

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders

alouds are the first thing left out of the reading time. We undervalue its impact on reading growth and must change that.” The team was very thoughtful in choosing the daily read alouds, thinking not only of the engagement picture books provide but also choosing read alouds that best connected to each day’s strategy.

To celebrate all the powerful work the students did throughout the summer, we

walked to the local public library. The librarians provided the students with a “behind the scenes” tour and a read-aloud. Each student also received a library card, and all had an opportunity to peruse the shelves and choose books to bring home. For many, this was their first time in a public library. The students were very excited to find that their favorite characters were on the shelves. For our multilingual learners, finding books in their home language inspired hushed shouts of joy at a new sense of agency. We had to remind our students that we still had to walk back to school. They left understanding that now they were readers and had the power to choose their own books from the library. What We Know

Children make the most reading gains in grade one. According to an article in

Reading Rockets by Learning First Alliance, the nine months of first grade are arguably the most important when it comes to learning to read. (Learning First Alliance, n.d.) Based on Fountas and Pinnell’s text level chart, students rise through five levels of text in first grade. We had hoped that our students would learn skills and strategies that would prepare them for success in grade two. We met that expectation, seeing students’ fluency levels increase. All 19 participants increased their reading level: eight students by two levels, five students by three levels, three students by four levels, and the remaining students increased their reading level by one level. It is also important to note that of the students who only increased their reading level by one level, one of these students is a level 1 EL student, and the others had absences in excess of one week.

Much of the evidence that undermines the success of summer programs points

to poor attendance. Our experiences substantiate this finding. The students with near-

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

perfect attendance in our program had the greatest learning gains, evidenced not only in the jumps in reading levels but also in the utilization of advanced reading habits. However, even the students who missed chunks of the program due to prior commitments advanced at least one reading level during the five weeks. The students were excited to attend each day and remained engaged throughout the five hours they were there.

While the increase in reading level is the most tangible marker of progress, we

were most impressed with the improved reading habits of all of our readers. We observed an increase in the use of strategies that propel students through increasingly complex texts. Students were staying within the text to decode words, re-reading for fluency without prompting, pausing to think and react to the text, self-correcting, and reading with expression.

One-third of the students in the summer program were identified as multilingual

learners. We looked at the strategies we use during our school year to support these students. The use of illustrated anchor charts, mini-lessons, time for authentic practice in leveled and decodable, and differentiated strategy groups lifted the level of all of our readers. The integration of translanguaging to build background and develop vocabulary propelled the students forward in both fiction and nonfiction texts. What We Learned

The summer provided us with the luxury of face-to-face interaction with each

family. We connected with an adult during our drop-off and pick-up each day. These short conversations provided the families with updates on progress and strategies to work on when reading with their children at home. The family members shared what they were noticing outside of the program. Their students were shouting out words as they drove home, they were eager to read at night, and they even taught their families the strategies they were learning. This personalized time between teacher and caregiver was invaluable to the success each student experienced.

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders

These daily interactions inspired us to create and share a bookmark (Image 1)

highlighting the strategies students learned along with a one-page tips sheet caregivers could refer to when reading aloud to their child at home. As teachers, our ultimate goal is to instill a love of reading and the confidence to read independently. The bookmark contains the strategies from the five weeks. Students are encouraged to refer to the bookmark if they get stuck. As Nell Duke (2020), renowned literacy leader, stated in When Young Readers Get Stuck, “Children need to read a lot to become proficient readers, and most children will not have the luxury of having an adult with them for all of that reading. Children’s developing ability to help themselves when stuck on a word will lead to more successful and satisfying reading.” The tips sheet contained dialogic reading concepts to support families in engaging in conversations around the books they are reading as well as cues the students were familiar with and would prompt them to keep going. With the right tools reading success is possible. Reflections on Moving Forward Going agreed

that

forward,

increasing

family

engagement during the five weeks is important. We would like to offer a session for the families before the program begins to focus on strategies for reading at home and end the program with a family conference. While we believe the quick conversations we had with caregivers were beneficial, we also Figure 1: Strategy Anchor Chart

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

understand the importance of a strong home-school connection. One thing we learned from our remote teaching is that our families are eager to support their students in any way they can. We want to make sure they have all the tools necessary to make this happen.

Our program was a success. None of us are certain about what the educational

experience will be like for our students going forward. Covid 19 has not gone away, and many districts are again faced with the challenge of determining the best ways to meet the needs of their students during more times of uncertainty. One thing we do know, however, is that our students did not lose any learning and will not in the future. Instead, they gained exposure to authentic texts at their level and the appropriate scaffolds they needed in order to progress further into a reading life. We gave this group of 19 students the gifts of time, instruction, and meaningful texts. They accepted it and blossomed into young readers ready for second grade.

The integration of translanguaging to build background and develop vocabulary propelled the students forward in both fiction and nonfiction texts.”

From Loss to Opportunity: How One School Accelerated the Reading of Rising Second Graders

Table 1: Sample Group Instructional Plan Day 1 *Introduce Reading JournalDraw and write favorite part from Read Aloud, take-home book bags

Units of Study Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 - Make a plan to read more and more

Units of Study Day 2

Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 Make a plan to read more and more

Units of Study Day 3

Day 4 *Introduce partner reading

Day 5 *Reading Journal- Who are the characters in your story?

Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 Make a plan to read more and more

Sight Words Sight word match sticks Magnetic letters w/ shapes

Sight Words Handwriting: Skyline, plane line, grass line, worm line

Sight Words (Writing) Write and share, “What are you excited for during the summer program?” (journal)

Units of Study

Sight Words

Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 Make a plan to read more and more

Rotate 2 groups • Group 1 plays Oops on their own • Group 2 plays Matching w/ teacher

Units of Study Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 Make a plan to read more and more

Sight Words Sight word Bingo

Sight Words Units of Study Day 6

Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 - Make a plan to read more and more

Units of Study Day 7

Group 1 - Short Vowel Power Groups 2 & 3 Make a plan to read more and more

Handwriting: Dictation (practice sky writing) • Group 1: /b/, /t/, /s/, /ă/, /o/ Sat, lap, sob, fib, rot, what, his, Is the rat on the log? • Group 2 + 3:/h/, /f/, /t/, /h/, /k/ Path, mush, tug, chip, cod, your, they, Fred had a math quiz.

Sight Words (Writing) Writing: Writing a letter • Create anchor chart • Review parts of a letter • Write a letter to a family member

References Duke, N.K. (2020) When Young Readers Get Stuck. ASCD. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/when-youngreaders-get-stuck Learning First Alliance (n.d.) First Grade Instruction. Reading Rockets. https://www.readingrockets.org/ article/first-grade-instruction Mader, J. (2020). What parents need to know about the research on how kids learn to read. The Hechinger Report. https://hechingerreport.org/what-parents-need-to-know-about-the-researchon-how-kids-learn-to-read/

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers Huijing Wen Department of Education, Moravian University Joshua Wilson Department of Education, University of Saint Joseph, Connecticut Dianna Wentzell Department of Education, University of Saint Joseph, Connecticut

Introduction Field experiences have long been part of teacher education programs with an aim to provide preservice teachers with opportunities to gain teaching knowledge through observation, assisting, instructing, or conducting research (National Council of Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2002). In the seminal report entitled “Transforming teacher education through clinical practice” by the National Council of Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE, 2010), a strong rationale was provided for the importance of field experience, which was quoted as follows: To prepare effective teachers for the 21st-century classroom, teacher education must shift away from a norm, which emphasizes academic preparation and course work loosely linked to school-based experiences. Rather, it must move

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

to programs that are fully grounded in clinical practice and interwoven with academic content and professional courses (p.ii). For more than a decade, NCATE has advocated that teacher preparation programs fundamentally shift to a new model of placing clinical practice at the center of teaching preparation.

Traditional models are flawed with the loose connection between

knowledge and skills learned in higher education and the classroom realities. In 2013, the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) published standards guiding the development and implementation of clinical field experiences in educator preparation. Built on the work established by NCATE to assert a focus on partnerships and co-creation of clinical education experiences, CAEP has become the successor to NCATE in the field of educator preparation and in the area of clinical practice. The edTPA, as a measure of preservice teacher quality, viewed the clinical experience as essential to teaching programs. Backed up with research that documented the positive effect of supervised field experiences across different teacher education programs (Connelly & Graham, 2009; Recchia & Puig, 2011), edTPA called for a structured and systemic field experience throughout an educational program.

In 2013, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), through its Interstate

Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC), described a new vision of effective teaching and laid out more rigorous standards for clinical experiences (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2013). CCSSO also developed a network approach to improvement. The Network for Transforming Educator Preparation promoted a partnership approach to make systemic improvements in educator preparation, including a more embedded approach to assessing candidate performance in clinical fieldwork.

The reforms in teacher education resulted in a refreshed focus on field teaching

practice. In response to the more rigorous requirements for clinical experience, more research is needed to understand the effectiveness of certain models of clinical experience in the teaching education program. Therefore, we sought to examine if and

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

how a pre-student teaching clinical experience embedded in a literacy methods course influenced preservice teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and skills in literacy as well as their perception of themselves as a literacy teacher. Conceptual Framework

The study is framed by the InTASC standards (Council of Chief State School

Officers, 2013). InTASC describes seven knowledge and skill domains critical for teachers to effectively design and deliver content-specific, standards-based instruction. Teacher candidates are expected to achieve competencies in the areas of lesson planning, instructional strategies, communication skills, student motivation, classroom management, assessment, and dispositions. Overall, InTASC provides a framework that teacher educators use to assess the quality of teacher preparation. It also serves as a guideline for teachers in the design of standards-based, evidence-based instruction. It is a helpful lens to analyze teacher candidates’ pedagogical knowledge and skill development.

The study is also guided by the theoretical lens related to the bodies of knowledge

for effective teaching (Grossman & Richert, 1988; Shulman, 1992). Content knowledge (CK) refers to the amount and organization of knowledge in a given subject matter. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) includes knowledge of theories of learning, general principles of instruction, philosophies of education, knowledge about learners, and principles and techniques of classroom management (Grossman & Richert, 1988). Shulman (1992) argued that having knowledge of subject matter and general pedagogical strategies, though necessary, was not sufficient for capturing the knowledge of good teachers. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), which is a purposeful combination of content and pedagogy, allows teachers to tailor pedagogies to content. Utilizing bodies of knowledge for effective teaching as a framework provides guidelines for teacher educators in engaged practices for developing effective teachers. Literature Review To investigate the impact of the pre-student teaching clinical experience on preservice

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

teachers’ pedagogical development and self-perception, we reviewed the literature on the benefits and limitations of clinical field experiences.

Field experiences create opportunities for teacher candidates to gain experience

and practice ideas through observations and student teaching practices. There is abundant empirical evidence in the literature about its benefits for teacher candidates. First and foremost, field experiences provide opportunities for teacher candidates to see themselves as teachers (Hixon & So, 2009), thus preparing future teachers for the complexity and diversity of the classroom and helping them to determine if teaching is the appropriate career choice (Phillion, Miller, & Lehman, 2005, Ludlow, Gaylon-Keramidas, & Landers, 2007). During field experiences, teacher candidates had the chance to test the theories and strategies they learn in real-time classroom situations (Leko & Brownell, 2011). Through actively engaging in the teaching profession, they develop problemsolving skills, gain confidence in instructing students with various backgrounds (Cook & Schirmer, 2006) and foster critical thinking skills (McGlamery & Harrington, 2007).

Field experiences are also found to be positively related to the improved self-

efficacy, shifted identities, and sustained pedagogical skill improvement among teacher candidates (Colson Colson, Sparks, & Berridge, 2017; Piro, Anderson, & Fredrickson, 2015; Reddy, 2012; Sciuchetti, & Yssel, 2019; Welsh & Schaffer, 2017). Reddy (2012) found that high-quality teacher preparation programs’ field experiences for pre-kindergarten to 6th-grade teacher candidates may serve as the link between preparing for the realworld classroom and increasing teacher candidates’ teaching efficacy. Piro et al. (2015) explored the perceptions of preservice teacher candidates who participated in a pilot partnership program. The researchers found that preservice teacher candidates perceived an expanded sense of comfort with teaching strategies, classroom management, and diversity during the actual teaching of the lessons in the field experience. Additionally, participants reported increased confidence levels with their own preparation to teach. Similar results were supported by Welsh and Schaffer’s (2017) study which examined the development of effective teaching skills in teacher candidates in the context of early

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

field experiences directly tied to a pedagogical course. Their findings suggested that secondary education candidates were able to develop effective teaching skills related to instructional strategies, classroom management, and curriculum design during an early field experience.

The importance of self-efficacy to teaching was well explained by Swars (2005)

and Gresham (2008). Swars viewed teacher efficacy as including both effective classroom instructional strategies and the willingness to try new teaching ideas. Gresham (2008) proposed teaching efficacy to represent a teacher’s confidence in his or her skills and capabilities to be an effective teacher and teacher’s belief that successful teaching can bring about student learning despite external factors such as family background, parental influences, and home environment. Therefore, teachers with a strong sense of personal teaching efficacy tend to spend more time planning what they teach. They tend to be more open to new ideas and teaching approaches, set higher goals, are more willing to try new strategies, and persevere through the profession’s challenges (Goddard, Hoy, & Hoy, 2000). Other than the benefit of improved self-efficacy among teacher candidates, there is evidence of shifted identities among teacher candidates from candidates-as-students to candidates-as-teachers, and a sustained and transferred effect for the enhanced general pedagogical proficiencies learned from the field experience (Welsh & Schaffer, 2017). Because of the positive results, the researchers stressed the importance of progressively integrating field experience within methods classes and saw it as encompassing concepts in teacher preparation programs.

Although field experiences are frequently seen as the most valuable and beneficial

part of teacher preparation programs, these experiences have the potential to be a source of frustration for some teacher candidates. With reference to the related literature, it becomes obvious that many teacher candidates tend to “survive” in the field, instead of using their field experiences to consider and practice the theories they learned in their teacher education programs (i.e. Korthagen & Kessels, 1999). There is research evidence showing that teacher candidates often have a hard time making connections between

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

university coursework and field experiences (see, e.g., Santagata, 2010). Indeed, teacher candidates often do not transfer what they learned in methods coursework to their teaching during clinical practice (Ball, Lubienski, & Mewborn, 2001). Other challenges include a loose connection between the teacher preparation program and the host schools for clinical experience. For example, systematic accountability mechanisms might not be in place to ensure the qualifications of university faculty, clinical practice supervisors, and cooperating teachers from P-12 schools to support novice teachers. Cooperating teachers might not be trained to nurture teacher candidates, providing very little guidance about what teachers should actually do once they are placed in the field (Darling-Hammond, 2006). Finally, teacher candidates’ tacitly held beliefs about teaching from their past experience in schools may impact the ways they interpret their experiences in the clinical experience field (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Mewborn & Tyminski, 2006).

To address the challenges listed above, researchers developed and tested the

effectiveness of different models of field experience, such as the field experience with different lengths (one-year vs. 16 weeks; see Colson et al., 2017), the Professional Development Schools (PDS) model, clinical practice through professional development learning community workshops (Chen, Daniels, & Ochanji, 2017), inquiry-based partnership-sponsored enrichment programs (Chandler-Olcott et al., 2018) or using reflective practices for the clinical experience (Subramaniam, 2013). For example, the National Research Council (NRC) Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Preparation (NRC, 2001) and NCATE (2010) considered PDS as and a promising model of school-university partnership and an exemplary approach to clinically-based teacher education with the ultimate goal of generating high-quality teaching and learning (National Association for Professional Development Schools, 2008). The clinical practice workshops (Chen et al., 2017) were created as a site of professional development and collaboration among university faculty, supervisors, on-site liaisons, and cooperating teachers. The participants interacted as equal partners and applied the ideas they learned from the workshops to enhance preservice teachers’ clinical experience. Other than

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

using different models for field experiences, researchers also suggested using reflection as a way to overcome the negative effects of the field experiences (Subramaniam, 2013; Wedman & Martin; 1986). Reflective thinking could open the door for preservice teachers to see the theories or research-based ideas they read about as opportunities for inquiry and not just ready-to-follow recipes for instruction (Doyle, 1990). Method

This qualitative research used a case study design to examine literacy preservice

teachers’ change of perceptions, pedagogical knowledge, and skills in planning and implementing literacy lessons as they participated in a field-based literacy course. By examining the impact of a clinical experience model on preservice teachers, the study can inform the extent to which this clinical field experience model can well prepare teacher candidates to teach literacy in the K-5 classroom and can also pinpoint challenges and areas for improvement. In addition, the case study, with its rich data and in-depth analysis, can provide important insights and an opportunity to explore the design of literacy teacher education coursework. Context of the study

This study was conducted at a small, private university in the Northeast region of

the United States. Data for this study were collected from a required capstone literacy methodology course. The course prepared students to design and teach standards-based literacy instruction. The first author, who designed and taught the course, introduced students to the reading/writing theories and instructional practices for English Language Arts blocks and designed a series of assignments focusing on literacy lesson design and delivery. The first and the second author participated in the supervision of the field experience and collected data for analysis.

An important part of the course is the embedded clinical experience named

“Tuesday Field Experience” (TFE), whose name is derived from the day when preservice teachers were out in the field. Designed for undergraduates to prepare them for the

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

student teaching in the following semester, TFE provided an opportunity to experience an elementary classroom and shadow a teacher every Tuesday for an entire semester. During the TFE, the candidates became actively involved with the students and the teachers, thus providing an in-depth opportunity for junior-year-undergraduate candidates to connect and apply the theory and pedagogical practices gained in the methods course to a classroom setting.

Preservice teachers were required to submit a portfolio of their work that

included written lesson plans and submitted weekly reflections of classroom activities (including teaching) and observations and any other artifacts of the work that they did in the classrooms. University supervisors visited the classrooms weekly to observe the preservice teachers teaching their lessons. They filled out evaluation forms and mid-term and final assessments. The cooperating teachers gave preservice teachers weekly written observation forms that included recommendations for improvement. Participants

Six undergraduate preservice teachers in their junior year participated in this study.

Their pseudo-names for the study were: Laura, Cara, Amelia, Kathy, Mary, and Janette. The course was taught in the spring semester of 2018. All students enrolled in the course were matriculating in either Elementary Education or Special Education programs. Demographics were typical for students enrolled in education courses at this University. Specifically, 50% of candidates identified as white, 17% identified as Latino, and 33% identified as multiracial. All were female (100%). Data Sources and Analysis

To answer the research question on the impact of the pre-student teaching clinical

experience on preservice teachers, qualitative data were collected and analyzed. These included teacher candidates’ weekly observation reflections, lesson plans, teaching reflections, in-class logs, two focused group interviews were given first in the middle and then toward the end of the clinical experience. In addition, clinical experience supervisors’

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

and cooperating teachers’ feedback on these preservice teachers’ lesson delivery was used for analysis.

The observation and teaching reflections were preservice teachers’ responses

to a set of guiding questions about classroom instruction, mentoring support, and their perception of themselves as teachers. These structured questions facilitated in-depth analyses of their classroom observation and teaching. Two focus-group interviews used the same set of semi-structured questions about preservice teachers’ experiences in the field, their professional identity and perception development of being a teacher, and their opinions about the TFE clinical experience program. In-class logs were used for preservice teachers’ sharing of their previous day field experience (i.e., stories, takeaways, or comments on the course content and its application in the field) during the literacy methods class.

All the data were coded and analyzed using qualitative coding. Data were analyzed

using a codebook based on codes emerging from these data and the theoretical framework on types of knowledge for effective teaching. The key domains of CK, PK, and PCK were reflected in the majority of reflection responses, lesson plans, and interviews. For example, an emerging code for CK (Content Knowledge) was defined in our codebook as including knowledge of English Language, literature, and literacy development and instruction (i.e., I am glad I learned how early oral language and phonological awareness contribute to children’s literacy development. I started to see the importance of doing read alouds on a daily basis); PK (Pedagogical knowledge) was coded for this response: “through the learning of this whole semester, I learned a lot about how to use grand conversation and group work to engage students in learning”. PCK (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) in this response of “My biggest takeaway from this class will be the SRSD method which I have implemented in lesson plans and have discussed with other teachers. I enjoy teaching writing by teaching self-regulated cognitive strategies’’.

The data analysis adopted a grounded theory approach by Charmaz (2006) and

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

Strauss and Corbin (1990). Initially, the first two authors engaged in the first round of open coding, which yielded twenty-five codes. Disagreements on codes were discussed and resolved. These codes were then compared and categorized into four broader topics: perceptions of themselves as teachers, codes derived from the theoretical framework on teacher knowledge, self-efficacy of preservice/novice teachers, and role of supervisor and cooperating teacher. After that, the second round of analysis was conducted by these two researchers to extract the common themes. Following that, the third round of analysis was conducted to compare across six different cases and summarize the overarching themes. Finally, the researchers coded data independently and then codes were compared and discussed until interrater reliability approached 100% for all data sources. Of note, inter-rater reliability of 80%-89% for the four rounds of coding was achieved. Findings

Data analysis from our multiple sources of data yielded four important findings.

1) Participation in the clinical experience resulted in preservice teachers’ increased pedagogical knowledge and skills across most InTASC domains. The improvement started with identifying the gaps in key areas for effective teaching. 2) Preservice teachers improved self-efficacy related to the design and implementation of literacy instruction although they struggled at the beginning. 3) There is variability in their perception toward being a teacher, which is probably associated with their self-efficacy and their relationship with the cooperating teachers. 4) The reflective practices were considered essential for preservice teachers’ pedagogical and perceptual development. Increased Content and Pedagogical Knowledge and Skills through Identifying Gaps

Preservice teachers found that extensive observation and teaching practice were

beneficial to their learning. Cooperating teachers’ and university supervisors’ evaluation forms, mid-term and final assessments showed a steady growth evidenced by the increase of overall mean scores from 3 to 4.5. The reflection data revealed that having experience with actual students before student teaching allowed preservice teachers to connect

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

pedagogy, standards, and actual experience. However, they all went through struggles at the beginning, when all of them felt at a loss teaching in front of the students, even with the well-prepared lesson plans. Their struggles centered on teaching lessons with developing content knowledge, adjusting lesson design to students’ responses during lesson delivery, classroom management issues such as time management, behavioral management, and how to engage and interact with students during teaching (i.e. how to give on-the-spot feedback to students’ answers). Many contributed their struggle to their developing content knowledge and pedagogy. Recognizing limited content knowledge as a major challenge

Our findings showed that the field experience provided rich opportunities for

preservice teachers to identify gaps in the areas central to their pedagogical development such as content knowledge, lesson design, and classroom management. The feedback from the cooperating teachers and university supervisors converged on the finding that one of the major challenges for teaching among the preservice teachers was their lack of solid content knowledge. When observing these preservice teachers teaching prepared lessons, there was a lack of concrete and in-depth explanation of the key concepts. The instruction tended to be carried out with some warm-up activities followed by student activities without modeling and explanation of the key concepts. During instruction, a weak connection was observed between ideas. The information was not made easily accessible to students in the language and examples were used. This understanding was concurred by the preservice teachers’ reflections. All the participants reflected upon their developing content knowledge: “My fear going into classrooms was that I wouldn’t know how to spell the word, or I would struggle with the meaning” and “I still need to work on content. Lessons are very hard to teach if you do not entirely understand what you are asking the students to do.”

Preservice teachers in the sample ascribed their lack of confidence in teaching to

their lack of solid content knowledge. Their reflection indicated that not fully understanding what they were teaching caused them fear and anxiety. Without solid content knowledge,

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

it is hard to create learning experiences that make the content accessible and meaningful for learners, let alone to assure students’ mastery of the content. Incomplete content knowledge also negatively impacted preservice teachers’ ability to manage classroom behavior. Students may be more likely to act out if they are confused; it worsens if the teacher is also confusing. This lack of content knowledge directly linked to behavior management issues is illustrated by the following comment: “…need to work on my content knowledge and comfort teaching those areas. This will take time recognizing the content and knowing the ideas inside and out, not to mention running into problem behaviors in the heat of instruction.” Understanding the difference between lesson design and lesson delivery

Similar gaps are also revealed in preservice teachers’ lesson planning and delivery

skills. Preservice teachers’ reflections all commented on how the field experience helped them see the limitations of their lesson design after teaching the lessons. They also found the difference between lesson plans and delivery. This allowed preservice teachers to identify the importance of developing appropriate sequencing of learning experiences and providing multiple ways to demonstrate knowledge and skill and adapt the lesson plan to the teaching situation. A common limitation of their lesson design was the lack of metacognitive talks for teaching the core concept or skills, no closure in their lessons to assess students’ learning, and a weak transition to the sequential lessons. One preservice teacher Laura remarked: “I do not believe I properly thought this lesson through. There were many holes in the lesson. For example, what were the strategies that I expected and wanted the students to use for this lesson? I did not do enough think-alouds during instruction. I rushed students to try it on without collaboratively working on the strategy… It led to some difficulty during the lesson.”

Here Laura critiqued her lesson plan for not delivering its goals because she did

not model the literacy strategy well through the gradual release of responsibility. Students were not given clear modeling of the strategy used. Although there was an explanation on the literacy strategy for writing procedural informational text, there was no modeling

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

on her part for the strategy, leading to students’ confusion when they were asked to work on the strategy independently. She remarked: “One area I think I need to work on is the delivery of my explicit teaching. I think I effectively include it into my lesson plans, but I need to improve the delivery. From watching my videos, sometimes my lessons seem to be squished together and it is hard to identify the explicit instruction aspect. I want to be clearer in presenting/ explicitly teaching them.”

The teaching observation data also showed that all six preservice teachers failed

to include a closure in the first three lesson plans. Cara reflected on improving the closure section of her lesson plans as follows: “The next thing I wish I did that would improve my lesson is to go over the questions together at the end. I feel like this would have given me a better understanding if the students got anything from the book and for me to really take time and have them build on their responses.”

Preservice teachers also realized that a well-designed lesson was not a guarantee

for teaching a good lesson since there were many factors affecting lesson delivery. Mary noted, “I need to continue to improve my delivery of content in the lesson. I have developed what is considered a reasonable lesson, but with poor development in practice, the content is lost. The differentiation ideals are very adaptable to text, but while performing it becomes much more difficult.” Cara admitted “a challenging part I faced was remembering everything I wanted to say during the lesson” while Amelia realized “the teacher models and explains that it is important and crucial to address and give the children that feedback. We need to ask the child why and how they came to their answer and try to fix that mistake or misconception.” The need to respond timely to students’ learning needs and organize thoughts in a logical way during delivery makes teaching lessons very challenging to these preservice teachers. Learning classroom management skills

Other skills that preservice teachers found lacking at the beginning but gained

substantially from the field experience were skills related to classroom management. All

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

preservice teachers found classroom management to be the most challenging aspect of teaching. For some of them, the cooperating teacher helped manage the class by getting students seated and ready for the preservice teachers’ lessons. However, once preservice teachers started teaching, other classroom management issues arose. For instance, managing the class while one student was on the whiteboard was challenging for Janette until Mr. Douglas mentored her. Janette noted: Something Mr. Douglas suggested that I didn’t even realize was finding a class expectation for what students should do when peers approach the board to do the grammar work in sentence composing. For example, I would ask students to watch student A as she composed the sentence. In your notebooks, take notes where she did something different or something wrong or maybe where you realized you might’ve been wrong. Here Janette realized that giving seated students a task would keep all students on task when the attention was not on the teacher. Doing this prevented students from getting distracted.

Another essential classroom management skill that preservice teachers learned

through the clinical experience, is “my ability to recognize certain (students) behaviors.” Janette explained that she could identify “two highly emotional students in the room” that she felt she had to interact with sensitively. She stated that going through this experience helped her develop “a new part of my personal teaching identity.”

Midway through the clinical experience, Laura noted: “I’m improving on classroom

management. Every lesson I teach, the students become more cooperative, and I learn to handle their behaviors.” Mary reflected “managing my student’s attention during my lesson was very challenging at the beginning. They had a high energy level yesterday and had a difficult time sitting still. Now I learned to engage them in more questions than I had originally planned because of this. This helped my classroom management.”

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Time management was found to be a big challenge in lesson delivery. Feedback

for the class observation from both cooperating teachers and university supervisors converged on the weak time management in real-time teaching. Although approximate time was included and planned in the lesson design, the real-time teaching posed challenges for keeping up with what is written in the lesson plan. Cara’s comments speak volumes of this challenge: Another thing I need to work on is time management. The problem with this lesson is that it doesn’t allow a response from all students due to its short nature. All students were actively engaged; however, only a few had the opportunity to participate in the lesson. But I felt the urge to try to see if most of the students were grasping the idea before they were given the final assessment.

The preservice teachers in our study learned, through teaching practice and self-

reflection, how to pace their instruction and adjust their lesson plans to be more realistic in terms of time and goals during delivery. They also developed skills in effectively communicating with students through both verbal and non-verbal communication and in motivating students with consciously projected teacher voice. At the beginning of the field experience, supervisors and cooperating teachers observed several issues regarding preservice teachers’ communications with students that improved with more practice and guidance. During instruction, all six preservice teachers failed to pay attention or respond to the students sitting at the back of the class. One of the observation feedbacks to Jannette from the supervisor noted: “A student had her hand up for almost 5 minutes, and you did not see her. You only saw the first row of students.”

There is research evidence showing that where a child sits in the classroom

matters. Wallace (2017) claimed that the students who sit in the front of the class are more engaged with the teacher and the lesson and thus get better grades. While the ones who sit at the back of the class “have a tendency to get distracted and watch other

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

kids instead of the teacher” (para. 8). It gets worse when the teacher calls on students in the front row to participate in the class discussion and ignores the hands of students in the back. Overlooking the back row might lead to low morale among students and prevents the teacher from reaching their educational objectives. There were also areas in verbal communication that posed challenges to preservice teachers. All preservice teachers except Jannette and Laura communicated with students in a low voice. Low voice makes it hard for students sitting at the back of the class to engage in the class. It may also indicate to students a lack of self-confidence and classroom management. Mary reflected: I believe that the area of teaching that I have improved on is how my voice is during the lessons, how I address my students, and how I interact with them. In my first lesson I was told and aware of being a bit too quiet while at the front of the room, I’d turn my back to them while at the board and I was giving too much of my time and not enough of their time. However, now I feel that I’ve improved in talking in a better voice, in giving the students the chance to talk and interact with me.

The observation feedback data and reflection data found evidence of the lack of

precision of language. Slang and colloquial language were abundant in the early weeks of field experience. For example, Amelia admitted: “What I need to work on is to stop saying ‘you guys’ or just the word ‘guys’ overall because it is something that I have noticed has been a habit of mine when I present and talk to the children. I need to work on the type of vocabulary that I use with them.” By the end of the field experience, Amelia called students “boys and girls” instead. Once the language used changed, she successfully created a boundary between herself and the students and managed the class better.

Classroom management also involved the skills of motivating students, which

required much practice. The preservice teacher, with the modeling and the guidance of the cooperating teacher, gradually learned and practiced engaging students in assignments

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

and relatable activities that required higher-order thinking. Laura, in order to motivate first graders, had to analyze the students’ behaviors and interests to figure out the best way to teach them. In teaching writing opinion essays for first-graders, Laura adopted the evidence-based strategy Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD). She tried to teach planning strategy (POW) through songs embedded with hand movement. Laura reported: “The POW song with the movement was inspiring. I spent a lot of time coming up with the hand movement to make a connection between the strategy mnemonics and the hand moments. Students had a blast and really engaged in the lesson. I loved that the lesson was short and sweet.” It is evident that Laura understood that planning the lesson’s activities to the interests and developmental level of the audience is essential in keeping students motivated. Mary, on the other hand, engaged students by “giving the students the chance to talk and interact with the teacher.” The preservice teachers came to realize that a teacher’s interactions with students or developing a personal relationship with students is an effective way to keep students motivated in the lesson. Gaining a sense of self-efficacy with developed teacher voice through a scaffold

Our data also showed that preservice teachers considered the clinical experience

as a learning opportunity for self-discovery with the modeling and feedback from the cooperating teachers. They realized the importance of being professional in the classroom, from the dress codes to the use of academic language during teaching. The analysis of the observation reflection and teaching reflection and interview data found a repetitive theme on preservice teachers’ increased self-confidence in managing the learning environment. These preservice teachers improved their self-efficacy in effectively managing classroom routines, transitions and keeping a positive classroom climate to support student learning. Their improvement in pedagogical knowledge and skill boosted their efficacy in teaching. Kathy wrote: My confidence has risen since the first lesson I taught at the beginning of the Clinical Experience. I’m not afraid to take control of the class and get work done. I only called on the eager or loud students; now, I try to make sure that every time I teach, I call on every student at least once.

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

Kathy’s quote shows that she connected her self-confidence with her awareness

of engaging all students in the class to participate in the lesson. Cara confirmed Kathy’s experience saying: “My confidence as a teacher has improved, and my classroom management strategies have improved.”

Indeed, finding their teacher’s voice is related to developing self-confidence to

establish their authority as teachers. One crucial factor in establishing a connection with students and ensuring successful classroom management is a teacher’s voice and authority. Preservice teachers needed to build rapport and positive interactions with the students to establish a positive learning environment. To do so, preservice teachers need to use their authoritative teacher voice to communicate their confidence and authority effectively as a teacher. Many of the candidates confessed that they struggled to find and deliver their teacher’s voice. Amelia admitted that she grappled to: “find my teaching voice. I also struggled with classroom management, and that’s why I had trouble with my teaching voice because I was not sure what type of tone would be appropriate to use with them.” Toward the end of the field experience, all of these preservice teachers reflected upon finding their “teaching voice”, which they believed benefitted student engagement and which they confessed they would not have learned from course instruction alone. Limited perception as a teacher

However, our findings revealed that there is variability among teachers toward

their perception about themselves as teachers, and the cooperating teacher may contribute to their perception. Preservice teachers who have a more positive relationship with cooperating teachers saw themselves as more like a teacher. For the preservice teachers who received harsher feedback during teaching demonstration yet developed their teacher identity. Their inability to fully express their own teaching pedagogies and their new understanding of the complexity of the teaching profession seemed to explain it. Amelia remarked: The area that I think that I have improved in the classroom is I am slowly starting to

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

get more confident in front of the class. I know that I still have a long way to go but I think that I am improving. I think another area that I have improved in is being an authority figure. I am not very good at scolding students or telling them that their behavior is not appropriate, and it needs to change. I feel like I need to work on all areas of my teaching writing lessons, being in front of the classroom, calling on multiple students, etc. Overall, I still don’t feel like a teacher, maybe even less so, because I still have a lot left to learn.

Mentorship by a cooperating teacher was a critical aspect of the preservice

teachers’ learning experience. However, when and how a teacher chose to mentor their mentee was equally important as the wisdom they wished to impart. Comparing Amelia’s to Janette’s experiences with their cooperating teachers shows clear evidence of when and how the cooperating teacher intervenes influenced the class dynamic, the preservice teacher’s confidence level, and their perception of being a teacher. Amelia explained that: As for what I found challenging, I was thinking about what to say and how to answer some of the students’ questions. I wasn’t too sure how to word some things, and I was stuck on what was the right thing to say to the class. The teacher of the room at some points intervened (which was fine); however, it did catch me off guard, and it made me nervous.

The data revealed that communication about how and when intervening in the

moment should be discussed in advance. Intervening as prompted by the preservice teacher might be agreed upon beforehand. Otherwise, intervening in the middle of a lesson may discourage preservice teachers. Janette’s experience was different from Amelia’s. She explained: “I appreciate that both my professor and the cooperating teacher didn’t intervene while I taught but instead waited to talk to me after the lesson and give feedback.”

These two incidents show that it is crucial to allow preservice teachers to teach and

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

handle the classroom without interruptions. Cooperating teachers can take notes and share recommendations after the lesson. Interrupting their teaching caused them to be confused and nervous. A clear, planned communication between preservice teachers and their cooperating teachers about the lesson plan before the lesson is delivered, was vital. Amelia noted: I had a few other things that I wanted to work on with the children, but my cooperating teacher provided some suggestions before my lesson and wanted me to do something else with the students. This threw me off a bit, and I feel that instead of doing what I wanted with the students, it ended up back-firing on me, and things became a bit chaotic.

The cooperating teacher’s lack of clear expectations and beforehand

communication led to what felt like “chaos” to Amelia. This could have easily been avoided by the cooperating teacher via setting an agenda and communicating curricular expectations well in advance of the lesson delivery. Effective Reflective Practices through Feedback

Overall, the clinical experience helped these preservice teachers learn about

themselves and explore their abilities as teachers. This self-discovery process was facilitated by the feedback received from the university supervisors and cooperating teachers, and their own reflection on the received feedback.

Laura stated: “I learned a lot about myself as I developed my teaching pedagogy.

What was challenging was hearing the feedback and trying to keep up with the lesson and observation reflection. Hearing the feedback was difficult because it is hard getting feedback, but as the semester continued, I started to get used to it.”

Laura’s quote indicated that at the beginning of the clinical experience, it was

hard to take feedback due to the resistance to self-reflection and looking inwardly at

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

what needed to develop or change in their teaching, or their beliefs. Still, as time went by, preservice teachers felt comfortable receiving the feedback and saw it as a means to improve and grow. The embedded clinical experience provided the context and opportunity for such interaction, communication, and growth.

In summary, the field experience made a positive impact on preservice teachers in

recognizing challenges from the content knowledge, developing their pedagogy, finding their teacher’s voice, understanding students’ behaviors, managing the classroom, and partly shaping their identities as teachers. This impact came not only from the weekly teaching practice in the field but also from a university course in which they received instruction and guidance. The university supervisors observed preservice teachers weekly with feedback for improved teaching. The cooperating teachers played a significant role in their transition from being students to developing their identity as teachers. Discussion

Our study supported previous studies in this line of research about the benefits of

clinical experience (e.g., Leko & Brownell, 2011; Cook & Schirmer, 2006). Our findings reveal pre-service teachers found that extensive observation and teaching practice were beneficial to their learning. They found that having experience with actual students before student teaching allowed them to connect pedagogy to the standards. Actual experience provided an opportunity for them to teach their lesson plans in a real classroom and then self-reflect on how the lesson went. This led to their discovery of weakness in content knowledge and the refinement of pedagogy. However, preservice teachers seemed to focus mostly on their CK and PK development without much realization of how PCK contributes to effective teaching. According to Shulman (1992), PCK in comparison is more sophisticated and nuanced to develop as it represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, represented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction. Without good content and skillful general pedagogy, it is harder to develop PCK.

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

Although these teacher candidates developed their pedagogy, our findings

suggest they all went through struggles at the beginning. Many attributed their struggle to their developing content knowledge. The importance of content knowledge appeals to common sense. Preservice teachers need to understand what they are teaching because not understanding what they are teaching might cause them fear and anxiety. This finding can be explained by the earlier research that preservice teachers have a hard time making connections between the course work and field experience (Cook & Schirmer, 2006). It is possible that the course has not been updated or needs improvement to better assess students’ content knowledge. It is also possible that the transference of content knowledge into teaching is complicated by the developing PK or PCK.

The findings of this study also raise the question about who is mainly responsible

for developing preservice teachers’ content knowledge. It is not possible to determine if the gap in content knowledge among these teacher candidates was due to ineffective preparation in content areas or the methods courses. Knowledge in the content area was often provided by specialized departments across the university campus while the methods courses mainly focus on content-specific methodology. Nevertheless, preservice teachers need continual support in developing content knowledge.

Additionally, our findings suggest the need to use reflective practice to prepare

effective teachers. In our study, preservice teachers continually reflect on the effect of their practice on student learning, the effects of their choices on all stakeholders, their ability to collaborate professionally, and especially how to use an evaluative frame of mind to differentiate practice to meet the needs of each learner. Reflection is identified as one of the standards that develop the core principles of becoming a professional educator at the university where the study was conducted. Reflections during the clinical experience gave them the space for greater self-awareness and laid the groundwork for students to improve. These reflections provided an opportunity for them to make connections, document questions, and chronicle new learning.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

It is also important to consider the role of the university supervisors and cooperating

teachers. The literature pointed out the barriers in the clinical experience in that some cooperating teachers lack training in how to mentor the preservice teachers (DarlingHammond, 2006). Although most of our preservice teachers considered the clinical experience as a learning opportunity for self-discovery with the modeling and feedback from the cooperating teachers, we found a relationship between lack of positive perception toward their teacher identify and lower level of self-efficacy in teaching and how the feedback was given by and whether the rapport was built with the supporting teacher and faculty. Good coaching opportunities provided by university supervisors and cooperating teachers could greatly elevate preservice teachers’ ability to understand and use content in their teaching, contribute to the improved self-efficacy in teaching, and help shape their teacher identity in a way. Therefore, training on how to mentor the preservice teachers in the field is also necessary.

Finally, we found our model of clinical experience was impactful. It contributed to

the rigor of the experience and the program quality. The program where our study was situated teaches research-based practices throughout our programs. Candidates first observe these skills in classrooms and then begin to practice them in methods courses. Through the continuum of coursework and clinical experiences, candidates used their knowledge to complete the teaching loop (assessment, instruction, assessment, feedback, instruction) and demonstrate implementation in the impact on student learning. The effectiveness of the field experience is evidenced by the alignment between preservice teachers’ pedagogical development and the domains of InTASC standards. This shows the importance of using InTASC standards to guide and measure preservice teachers’ progress in the clinical experience. For example, the link between lack of solid content knowledge and self-efficacy is supported by InTASC Standard #4 on content knowledge, where it specifies the importance of teachers understanding the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) being taught. Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research

This study has several limitations. This study could benefit from methodological

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

improvements like increased sample size, gathering interview data from the cooperating teacher, and collecting data for the video-recorded teaching. For future research, various clinical experiences could be explored to compare and contrast with the current clinical experience model. Such comparisons will be helpful in pinpointing what kinds of challenges and strengths preservice teachers have across contexts. Future research can also adopt a mixed-method approach to obtain a more generalizable understanding of the preservice teachers’ clinical experiences. Educational Implications

Findings from our study, albeit a qualitative case study, have the following

educational implications. First, teacher candidates seemed to benefit from the explicit instruction presented in the methods course, good modeling, extensive teaching practice, and reflective practice in the field. Thus, effective preparation of novice teachers likely includes a balance of knowledge-based and pedagogy-focused coursework coupled with a great deal of teaching practice and reflection in the field.

Second, given some preservice teachers’ lack of self-efficacy or having a hard

time perceiving themselves as teachers, it will be important for university supervisors and cooperating teachers to be supportive and to raise novice teachers’ awareness of key elements of being a good teacher. It is important for students to understand that being a good teacher takes practice, effort, and perseverance. Thus, it also is important for educators to cultivate supportive learning environments in real classrooms to foster these affective components of teacher development. Conclusion

This study explored the impact of a clinical experience embedded in a required

literacy methods course. It extends the literature by examining one approach to the preparation of literacy teachers through a purposeful and intensive field experience. By integrating a whole-day field experience before student teaching in the literacy methods class, the cooperating teacher and the faculty who designed and taught this course

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

prepared teacher candidates with the knowledge and skills for literacy instruction. Teacher candidates perceived the benefits and the challenges of this approach as well as the implications for their own practice. This research is important to literacy practitioners because it is centered on close examination of how teacher educators can design clinical experience and work effectively with cooperating teachers to prepare teacher candidates to design and teach pedagogically strong, standards-based literacy instruction. Literacy teachers and teacher educators have a better understanding of how intentional clinical experience design supported the development of teacher candidates’ skills, knowledge, and perception of literacy instruction. References Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., & Mewborn, D.(2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 433-456). Macmillan. Chandler-Olcott, K., Dotger, S., Waymouth, H., Crosby, M., Lahr, M., Hinchman, K., Newvine, K., & Nieroda, J. (2018). Teacher candidates learn to enact curriculum in a partnershipsponsored literacy enrichment program for youth, The New Educator, 14:3, 192-211, DOI: 10.1080/1547688X.2017.1407852 Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. sage. Chen, R., Daniels, E., & Ochanji, M. (2017). Clinical practice in the center: Enhancing learning and collaboration in clinical practice through professional development learning community workshops. Middle School Journal, 48(4), 3-12. Colson, T., Sparks, K., Berridge, G., Frimming, R., & Willis, C. (2017). Pre-service Teachers and Self-Efficacy: A Study in Contrast. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 8(2), 66-76. http://dx.doi. org/10.1515/dcse-2017-0016 Connelly, V., & Graham, S. (2009). Student teaching and teacher attrition in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32, 257–269. DOI:10.1177/0888406409339472 Cook, B. G., & Schirmer, B. R. (2006). An overview and analysis of the role of evidence-based practices in special education. In B. G. Cook & B. R. Schirmer (Eds.), What is special about special education: The role of evidence-based practices (pp.175–185). Pro-Ed. Council of Chief State School Officers (2013). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards and Learning Progressions for Teachers 1.0: A Resource for Ongoing Teacher Development. Author. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful Teacher Education: Lessons from Exemplary Programs. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Doyle, W. (1990). Themes in Teacher Education Research. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (pp. 3-24). Macmillan Pub. Co. Feiman-Nemser, Sharon. (2001). Helping Novices Learn to Teach. Journal of Teacher Education. 52. 17-30. 10.1177/0022487101052001003. Goddard, Roger & Hoy, Wayne & Hoy, Anita. (2000). Collective Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning, Measure, and Impact on Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal. 37. 479-507. DOI:10.3102/00028312037002479. Gresham, G (2008). Mathematics anxiety and mathematics teacher efficacy in elementary pre-service teachers. Teaching Education, 19(3), 171-184. Grossman, P., & Richert, R. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A reexamination of the effects of

The Impact of Pre-student Teaching Clinical Experience on Literacy Preservice Teachers’ Pedagogical Development and Their Perception as Teachers

teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 53-62. DOI:10.1016/0742-051X(88)90024-8 Hixon, E., & So, H. J. (2009). Technology’s role in field experiences for preservice teacher training. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 12(4), 294-304. Korthagan, F. & Kessels, J. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(4), 4-17. Leko, M. & Brownell, M.T. (2011) Special education preservice teachers’ appropriation of pedagogical tools for teaching reading. Exceptional Children, 77 (2),229-251. Doi: 10.1177/001440291107700205 Ludlow, B. L., Gaylon-Keramidas, C., & Landers, E. J. (2007). Project STARS: Using desktop conferencing to prepare autism specialists at a distance. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 26(4), 27-35. McGlamery, S., & Harrington, J. (2007). Developing reflective practitioners: The importance of field experience. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, Spring, 33-35, 45. Mewborn, D., & Tyminski, A. (2006). Lortie’s apprenticeship of observation revisited. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26(3), 30–32. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE]. (2002). Professional standards for the accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, NCATE (2010). Report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Transforming Teacher Education through Clinical Practice: A National Strategy to Prepare Effective Teachers: Report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships. Washington DC. http://www.ncate.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=zzeiB1OoqPk%3D&tabid=715 Phillion, J., Miller, P. C., & Lehman, J. D. (2005). Providing field experiences with diverse populations for preservice teachers: Using technology to bridge distances and cultures. Multicultural Perspectives, 7(3), 3-9. Piro, J.S., Anderson, G., & Fredrickson, R. (2015). Quality and early field experiences: Partnering with Junior Achievement. Teacher Educator, 50 (1), 31-46. Recchia, S. L., & Puig, V. I. (2011). Challenges and inspirations: Student teachers’ experiences in early childhood special education classrooms. Teacher Education and Special Education, 34, 133–151. doi:10.1177/0888406410387444 Reddy, A.M. (2012). Influence of teacher preparation programs’ field experiences on pre-service teacher candidates’ sense of teaching efficacy. [Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, Teaching and Learning, Old Dominion University]. doi: 10.25777/at68-f382 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/ teachinglearning_etds/39 Santagata, R. (2010). Learning from Teaching: Why analysis abilities are an important component of teacher knowledge. In what do teachers need to know and be able to do in tomorrow’s schools? Pearson Evaluation Systems, Pp. 73-80. Sciuchetti, M. B., & Yssel, N. (2019). The development of preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for classroom and behavior management across multiple field experiences. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(6). https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol44/iss6/2 Shulman, L. (1992). Ways of seeing, ways of knowing, ways of teaching, ways of learning about teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, 393-396. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Inc. Subramaniam, K. (2013). Examining the content of preservice teachers’ reflection of early field experiences. Research in Science Education, 43 (5), p1851-1872. Swars, S. L. (2005). Examining perceptions of mathematics teaching effectiveness among elementary preservice teachers with differing levels of mathematics teacher efficacy. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(2), 139-147. Wedman, J., & Tessmer, M. (1991). Adapting instructional design to project circumstance: The layers of necessity model. Educational Technology, 31(7), 48-52. Retrieved July 31, 2021, from http://www. jstor.org/stable/44427688 Welsh, K.A., & Schaffer, C. (2017). Developing the effective teaching skills of teacher candidates during early experience. Education Forum, 81 (3), 301-321.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping Katie Curran Carr School of Education, Lesley University

The first time that I read excerpts from David Kilpatrick’s (2018) book, Equipped

for Reading Success, I was left dumbfounded. Yes, the content is intriguing, but my feelings of bewilderment stemmed from the fact that I was ten years into my elementary teaching career and was just now developing an understanding of orthographic mapping. I immediately put the book down, texted my colleague, and said, “You have to read Kilpatrick’s work on orthographic mapping. How have we never learned about this before?”

For better or worse, I know that I am not alone in this experience. When one considers

the wide range of topics that preservice teachers must be literate in prior to setting foot inside a classroom, it is understandable that orthographic mapping rarely makes the cut. With the Common Core State Standards balanced approach to foundational early literacy skills, teachers are now better armed with directionality as they teach to standards that develop student’s word-level processes, vocabulary, oral discourse, conventions of writing, and most importantly, comprehension and composition skills (Morrow & Gambrell, 2019).

But what about all of the teachers who completed pre-service training prior to

Massachusetts’s 2010 adoption of Common Core? What about the teachers who were too busy trying to juggle all of the other responsibilities of the job that they did not have

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

the mental capacity to learn about a complex topic like orthographic mapping? This was certainly the case for me. Recently, I found myself wondering, “How can ongoing, inhouse professional development meet the needs of teachers who have the capacity and desire to dig deeper into the complexity of literacy instruction?”

Recently, I was enrolled in a graduate course at Lesley University focused on the

various roles of a reading specialist. As part of this course, I developed a professional development experience for elementary teachers and facilitated it for my Lesley classmates. I envisioned that the session that we did together would be one in a series of professional development experiences that would target topics that one might wish that they had learned about earlier in their career. I aptly named the series What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training and dubbed the first installment What I Wish I Had Learned: Orthographic Mapping. What Is Orthographic Mapping?

A common topic of discussion amongst teachers at every elementary grade level

is the issue of fluency. It is difficult to teach, assess, and monitor. Kilpatrick (2018) argued that “good readers do not struggle over words – continually guessing or sounding them out. When they see words, they immediately recognize them” (p. 3). Many teachers feel comfortable teaching prosody through exercises such as read alouds and readers’ theater, but achieving automaticity is arguably harder to understand. For many, its elusiveness makes it harder to teach.

Orthographic mapping, first described by Ehri (2013), is defined by Kilpatrick (2018),

is “the mental process we use to efficiently store words for instant, effortless retrieval” (p. 4). While this definition might make it sound simple, orthographic mapping is complex. The use of fMRIs in current brain research allows educators to better understand the regions of the brain that are used during the reading processes. There is no one area of the brain that is responsible for the reading process, but rather it is a neural network. The three crucial neural systems are located in the left hemisphere of the brain (Figure 1). In a

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

typical reader, these three areas work together seamlessly to help students progress from developing an understanding of the alphabetic principle to becoming fluent readers.

Figure 1: The Neural Systems for Reading

Note. From Essentials of Dyslexia Assessment and Intervention by N. Mather and B. J. Wendling (p. 48), 2012, John Wiley & Sons. Copyright 2012 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. For more information about these processes, see Dehaene (2010).

A sight word is a word that is recognized instantly, automatically, and effortlessly,

without sounding it out or guessing. Whether the word is phonetically regular or irregular is insignificant. Either way, these sight words are stored in the student’s sight word vocabularies and can be instantly and effortlessly recognized (Kilpatrick, 2018). Once stored, effortless retrieval of these words contributes to fluent reading – the kind of reading where one does not need to focus on the utilization of print strategies to decipher unknown words. Because reading is ultimately about making meaning, teachers are always striving to build up a student’s sight word vocabulary so mental energy can be directed towards comprehension.

Though science proves otherwise, many people still assume that students become

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

fluent readers by using their visual memory to take and store mental photographs of every word that they encounter. Beyond helping students to learn letters through recognition of their unique visual forms, visual memories cannot take credit for efficient word recognition. As outlined above, there are other areas of the brain that play crucial roles in the reading and mapping process.

When a student “maps” a word, they start by hearing sequences of sound that

they recognize. The sounds that they hear are then matched to the same sounds that have already been stored in their oral/mental filing system (Kilpatrick, 2018). For example, when one hears the word “cat”, they recognize each of those phonemes (/k/, /ă/, /t/) and then match them to the same familiar sequence that has already been stored inside their brain. What one might not know is that the same oral dictionaries are also activated when one sees the word “cat”. In other words, when one sees the word “cat”, the brain is not searching for a file that houses a visual match for the word. Instead, it matches the sound sequences in the word to corresponding stored sound sequences. Humans input words visually but store them phonologically. This is part of the reason why it is crucial that students develop strong phonemic awareness skills. Students with strong phonemic awareness skills immediately recognize the relationship between the sounds associated with a word’s pronunciation and the letters that represent those sounds in print.

So, what does it mean to “map” a word? Kilpatrick (2018) argued that “when [a]

student learns a letter/sound combination to the automatic level, the sight of that letter immediately and effortlessly activates the sound associated with it. When a student sees the letter t, /t/ sound is instantly activated in the temporal lobes (the area of the brain that stores auditory/phonological information)”(p. 36). As letter-sound knowledge develops, students no longer decode sound by sound, but instead, chunks of letters “unitize” and soon become recognized as units (e.g., -ing, -ap, dis-). In fact, when humans read, their eyes actually take in about 11–13 letters at a time (Kilpatrick, 2018). When a familiar unit of letters is recognized (the orthography), this activates the oral word (the phonology) which in turn activates the meaning (the semantics) associated with the word. (Figure 2).

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Figure 2: Accessing Word Meaning in Reading

Note. From Equipped for Reading Success: A Comprehensive, Step-by-Step Program for Developing Phonemic Awareness and Fluent Word Recognition (p. 38), by D. A. Kilpatrick, 2018, Casey & Kirsch Publishers. Copyright 2018 by Casey & Kirsch Publishers.

One can imagine how this process looks when all is sped up (and oversimplified).

While reading, the eyes move across the page, taking in units of familiar letters at a time. Some units may be unfamiliar and need to be read using word reading strategies such as decoding (Ehri, 2013). But familiar units, or units that have been decoded enough times that they are committed to memory, are automatically recognized and the pronunciation of the word is activated. The brain then associates meaning with these words. Students also use their syntactical knowledge to make sense of the word in context. Orthographic mapping, as outlined above, refers to the process by which readers form connections between written units (graphemes or larger units) and spoken units (phonemes, syllables, or morphemes) (Ehri, 2014). Orthographic mapping is the cornerstone to vocabulary acquisition, fluent reading, and accurate spelling.

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

Why Teachers Should Learn About Orthographic Mapping

This past year, more than ever, teachers have been asked to embrace myriad

responsibilities, both to advance their student’s learning as well as advocate for both their own as well as their students’ health, wellness, and safety. As schools begin to return to a new normal, one should consider the ways in which teachers can be supported to hone their craft, refine what they already do, and invest in research-based methods. One way that the administration might foster a deeper level of investment is by offering teachers context through which they can better understand why they do what they do. What does the research say about what teachers know to be good teaching?

When contemplating what I wanted my colleagues to walk away with from our

What I Wish I Had Learned: Orthographic Mapping session, I reflected on the fact that as literacy educators, we engage students in a variety of literacy-related activities that are often pulled from a curriculum, text, or are a strategy that we have learned through a colleague. However, do we truly understand the value of the activities that we employ? If we can better understand the pedagogical intention behind them, the research that supports their value, then would we be more likely to regularly include and differentiate them within our daily practice?

In Chapter 6 of Equipped for Reading Success, titled “Word Study Activities that

Promote Orthographic Mapping,” Kilpatrick (2018) not only outlined a variety of researchbased, effective word study activities, but he also offered insight into how they promote orthographic mapping. When reading the section on the importance of asking students to highlight rime units, I was immediately reminded of the years in which I taught the Fundations (Wilson, 2005) curriculum to classes of First Graders. As part of the curriculum, I would model and ask students to highlight and box rime units in words. Kilpatrick (2018) argued that this strategy positively impacts students’ ability to map letter sequences: This technique draws student’s attention to the overall structure of the word, and will minimize guessing. When children guess, they use the overall “look” of the

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

word as a cue. They don’t take account of every letter or syllable. But when you highlight the internal structure of words, you increase the likelihood that they will pay attention to the letter sequence. The simplest way to do this is to underline the rime units in words you present to children (p. 61).

While seemingly obvious to a relatively experienced teacher, I was shocked by

the fact that I had never stopped to really contemplate, name, and appreciate the value of this useful technique. I found myself thinking, “I wish I had learned about this earlier!” I now better understood the why behind a practice that I had employed for years. I felt a renewed sense of ownership for the strategy, a willingness to use it in contexts outside of Fundations lessons, and a commitment to incorporate this practice, even during times when I felt rushed and may have otherwise found it to be mundane.

In creating the What I Wish I Had Learned: Orthographic Mapping professional

development experience, my hope was that other teachers would have similar revelations. I wanted them to walk away feeling reinvigorated and recommitted to practices that promote orthographic mapping. During a time when there is rigorous debate around what effective literacy instruction should look like, it felt appropriate to arm teachers with information that would better help them engage in this conversation from a place of experience and research-backed expertise. Professional Development Experience

Prior to the first meeting, I planned to provide teachers with a digital folder of

resources that would help them learn about the topic ahead of time. The resources included a synopsis of Chapter 4 in Equipped for Reading Success (Kilpatrick, 2018) and links to videos that explained orthographic mapping (Ms. Jane’s Tutoring and Dyslexia Services, 2019, 2020). By asking teachers to review the materials prior, I wanted to ensure that our study group time would be used to make meaning together, which is arguably a better use of everyone’s time.

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

The work of teacher-leader Jen Allen (2016) inspired me to design the professional

development experience in the format of a study group. Allen suggested that study groups provide a sustainable structure for teachers to make meaning together, ruminate on new ideas, and support one another through the challenges of implementing the new practices. They are voluntary spaces in which teachers can individualize their learning and bridge theory and practice (Allen, 2016).

The topic of orthographic mapping translates well to this format because it is an

abstract and complex topic that teachers need to wrestle with in order to fully understand. A study group would provide a safe space for teachers to re-read passages, ask questions, and clarify each other’s learning. It is also important that the study group be voluntary. In order for teachers to be open to new learning, they must feel that they have agency, choice, and control in their learning. After being given time to review background information on orthographic mapping, teachers were asked to ponder the following questions: •

What is significant about this information on orthographic mapping?

•

How does new knowledge about orthographic mapping influence our work as teachers?

Use of the Meaning Making Protocol from School Reform Initiative (Baron, 2017) added structure to the subsequent discussion and ensured a level of engagement while maintaining equity of voice. Teachers shared insights and revelations about orthographic mapping, such as “We need to provide specific instruction to strengthen these pathways” and “Mapping and phonics share similarities but are not the same.” A group member lightheartedly said, “Every word wants to be a sight word when it grows up!”, a phrase often attributed to language and literacy scholar, Dr. Jan Wasowicz. Teachers were able to comment on each other’s takeaways, and together we deepened our understanding of the topic.

Next, teachers broke out into groups and dove deeper into one particular

orthographic mapping activity that could be used in their classrooms. The activity choices

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

included the Phoneme to Grapheme Mapping Technique, Using Look-Alike Words, and Mapping So-Called Irregular Words (Kilpatrick, 2018). In these small groups, teachers read excerpts from Equipped for Reading Success and previewed additional resources that exemplified or extended the strategy, such as a website called Heart Word Magic (Really Great Reading, 2015) that offered videos that support learning of irregular sight words. Teachers then were asked to discuss the following questions: •

How does this strategy promote orthographic mapping?

•

What might this strategy look like in my classroom (or a classroom)?

Following the breakout sessions, teachers returned to the main group and shared

their insights about the activities with the group. Though these strategies were familiar to many of the teachers in the group, the intention was to ask teachers to examine these practices through the lens of their newly developed understanding of orthographic mapping. In other words, the focus of this activity was not to give teachers new strategies to try in their classroom (although this was the case for some). Instead, the goal was to give teachers new insight into practices that they may already employ or did employ at some point in their literacy instructional career. Empowering Teachers to Make Informed Pedagogical Decisions

As part of my Reading Specialist program at Lesley University, I am also enrolled

in a course titled Perspectives on Literacy, Learning, and Teaching. As part of this course, students are being asked to examine how different perspectives and theories shape their instructional practice. In Tracey and Morrow’s (2017) text, titled Lenses on Reading: An Introduction to Theories and Models, the authors suggested that “the more lenses educators possess for examining the reading process and instruction, the better equipped they will be to understand, facilitate, and articulate literacy development” (2017, p. x). The more knowledge that teachers have regarding the theories and models that influence common instructional practices, the better equipped they are to make informed decisions that best serve their students. In an era where there is more to accomplish in the school

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

day than time will allow, knowledge about which practices are pedagogically sound and best suited to address students’ needs means that students and teachers are making the most out of their time together.

Tracey and Morrow (2017) also argued that “exemplary educators are able to

articulate the relationships between what they do in the classroom and their theoretical reasons for doing so” (p. 6). By empowering teachers with new research-based information about orthographic mapping, they are now better able to understand the value behind three common word-study activities that they may already be using in their classroom or may decide to use in the future. Reflection

Upon completing my professional development session with my fellow

colleagues, I collected feedback. One common trend was that teachers appreciated the balance of whole group work as well as the opportunity to work in smaller groups. One participant said that the combination of the two was “a good mix between informative and interactive.” Another trend was an appreciation for the resources that were provided ahead of time. Teachers enjoyed being able to learn about the topic on their own prior to discussing it with colleagues. This structure allowed teachers to enter the conversation with a certain degree of background knowledge, which created a richer, more equitable conversation in which no one person was viewed as the expert.

One valuable suggestion was to include an opportunity for teachers to see what

the three instructional strategies look like in action. I recognize that for some the strategies were familiar, but the audience did include new teachers for whom the strategies were new. If I facilitate the professional development session again with my school colleagues, I would work to record myself or a colleague implementing the strategy with students so that teachers could see what the strategy looks like in practice. Recordings of these videos could then be shared with the teachers afterward (along with all the other resources) so that teachers could reference them prior to trying a strategy in their own classrooms. I

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

also think it would be valuable to end the session by pairing teachers together who are interested in exploring and implementing the same strategy. Conclusion

Teachers are busier than ever. Instead of adding more stories to the metaphorical

building that is our teaching practice, let us reinforce areas where the breeze is blowing through, thereby resulting in an overall stronger structure. Teachers deserve to be offered ongoing opportunities to learn about what they may not have learned during their preservice training and to engage in ongoing, meaningful professional development that highlights research-based instructional strategies. Whether highly experienced or new to the profession, all teachers add valuable contributions to discussions in which they build meaning together.

Through exploration of a topic such as orthographic mapping and its impact on

automaticity and sight word recognition, teachers can be empowered as they develop a richer understanding of this crucial strand in the woven rope that is skilled reading (Scarborough, 2001). When teachers embrace a fresh perspective and lens on practices that they may already employ, they may feel reinvigorated. Empowered and reinvigorated teachers can make more clearly informed decisions about how their literacy instruction is choreographed. When this occurs, teachers and students benefit. References Allen, J. (2016). Becoming a literacy leader: Supporting learning and change (2nd ed.). Stenhouse Publishers. Baron, D. (2017, November 16). The meaning making protocol. School Reform Initiative. http:// schoolreforminitiative.org/doc/making_meaning.pdf Dehaene, S. (2010). Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. Penguin Group USA. Ehri, L. C. (2013). Orthographic mapping in the acquisition of sight word reading, spelling memory, and vocabulary learning. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438 .2013.819356 Kilpatrick, D. A. (2018). Equipped for reading success: A comprehensive, step-by-step program for developing phoneme awareness and fluent word recognition. Casey & Kirsch Publishers. Mather, N., & Wendling, B. J. (2012). Essentials of dyslexia assessment and intervention. John Wiley & Sons. Morrow, L. M., & Gambrell, L. B. (2019). Best practices in literacy instruction (6th ed.). The GuILFord Press. Ms. Jane’s Tutoring and Dyslexia Services. (2019, September 4). Orthographic mapping part I: How we store

What I Wish I Had Learned in my Preservice Training: Orthographic Mapping

words for proficient reading [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL_vCCP-YtU Ms. Jane’s Tutoring and Dyslexia Services. (2020, January 6). Orthographic mapping part 2: how we store words for proficient reading-equipped for reading success [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=ZKaY7IRj4xU Really Great Reading. (2015). Heart word magic - Help students learn to read and spell high frequency words. https://www.reallygreatreading.com/heart-word-magic Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). GuILFord Press. Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2017). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and models (3rd ed.). The GuILFord Press. Wilson, B. (2005). Fundations Classroom Set Level 1 [Kit]. Wilson Language Training.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom Kristen Poisson Principal, Hopedale Public Schools

Social-emotional learning should always be a cornerstone of early childhood

classrooms. When staff and families had to make the sudden shift to remote learning in the spring of 2020 and then continue with hybrid learning through much of the last school year, it became clear just how important SEL is for our youngest learners, particularly in times of unrest. Coupling literacy with social-emotional learning became a wonderful way for staff to ease fears and anxiety and bring students together, whether they were learning at home or in person. Trade books are a versatile way to bring topics to life within a classroom. When it comes to social-emotional learning, there is a wealth of titles out there that lend themselves to supporting students’ social and emotional success at school.

As we as educators know well, reading to young children fosters endless benefits,

from improving language skills to building stronger vocabulary to strengthening the adultchild bond. “There is ample evidence related to the benefits of reading aloud, including an acknowledgment that the frequency of reading to children at a young age has a direct causal effect on their schooling outcomes regardless of their family background and home environment.” However, last year, as young students across the globe turned to computer screens to connect with their teachers and peers, perhaps the most important

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

benefit was the opportunity for human connection. Books offer children insight into themes, genres, and problems that elicit responses, connections, and opportunities to share their feelings. They offer teachers an opportunity to be intentional about the material selected and the ability to offer their own personal connections to a text, often leading students to feel more of a connection as well.

While pandemic learning presented challenges at all levels of education, it was

exceptionally challenging for teachers to reach and connect with our youngest learners. While older students had more of an ability to attend to online learning, engaging early learners through a computer screen presented a number of unique challenges. Hybrid schedules made it difficult to settle into a routine. Throughout the challenges, early childhood educators across the globe continued to find innovative ways of connecting with students, families, and colleagues. While there were some components of pandemic learning many of us would not want to revisit, there were certainly successes and opportunities to reflect on past practice.

If the 2020-2021 school year presented a massive shift in everything we thought

we knew about education, the 2021-2022 school year presents the opportunity to settle into a “new normal.” Things have begun to shift back towards a pre-COVID world, but we still live in the shadow of a pandemic. There continues to be work to be done to connect with students and their families. How can we take the lessons of the 2020-2021 school year and move into our new normal while still maintaining the emotional connections we had with students pre-pandemic and helping them to achieve all they can academically, socially, and emotionally during their school careers? Reworking the Education System

Following the unprecedented closure of schools around the world during the

COVID-19 pandemic, the many shifts and need for change prompted questions and a reexamination of education as we knew it. As schools returned to in-person learning, teachers, school leaders, and other educational professionals were forced to reinvent

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

many aspects of what goes on day to day in classrooms. For many students across the country, this meant a closer look at the implications of the pandemic on their mental health and wellbeing. Schools could not provide a cookie-cutter approach to socialemotional learning because of the varied experiences and impacts the pandemic had on their students.

As we continue to push forward with progress in bouncing back from the

pandemic, we must continue to examine the social and emotional wellbeing and skills of our students with a close lens. While social-emotional learning has always been of great importance, not in quite some time has a global event touched the lives of so many families around the world.

Literature has always served as a tool for delivering instruction in all curriculum

areas. Children’s literature is often used in math lessons, social studies lessons, science lessons, art lessons, etc. However, social-emotional learning may be an area where literature can be most useful, particularly in the times we live in. “SEL programming fosters students’ social-emotional competencies by establishing positive classroom and school cultures, climates, and conditions for learning that are caring, cooperative, culturally responsive, well-managed, participatory, and safe...there is the growing body of research showing that SEL helps raise student academic performance and positive behaviors while reducing negative behaviors such as school suspensions and drug use.” By using children’s literature to better serve students in accessing social-emotional skills, teachers are not only furthering their social-emotional development but combining those efforts with the huge benefits of reading aloud to children. Teachers are setting their students on the road to success with both their academics and mental health. Using Children’s Literature to Foster Emotional Literacy

When students returned to their schools following the pandemic closure in 2020,

it was unlike any return to school from the past. Every child had had a different experience over the lengthy period of being at home. All children experienced a shift in their day-

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

to-day lives but beyond that, there was a spectrum of experiences and emotions that many young children did not have the vocabulary to vocalize. Some children could have perhaps experienced anxiety at home, family stress over lost jobs, illness, or even death in their families due to the pandemic. Many children had not seen an extended family in quite some time. Whatever the specifics of a child’s experience, the one common theme in all families was an unexpected change to some degree. These life experiences can pose challenges beyond the surface, as is explained in the Elsevier Public Health Collection, a collection of research-based on the COVID-19 pandemic, “Epidemics or pandemics, such as COVID-19, produce potential risks to child development due to the risk of illness, protective confinement, social isolation, and the increased stress level of parents and caregivers. This situation becomes an adverse childhood experience (ACEs) and may generate toxic stress, with consequent potential losses for brain development, individual and collective health, and the long-term impairment of cognition, mental and physical health, and working capacity of future adults.” Students returned to school in the fall of 2020 with collective experiences that posed challenges for educators in all roles in schools throughout nations across the world.

As young children returned to classrooms, education was being rebuilt from

the ground up. However, the age-old institution of reading aloud to children and using children’s literature to teach students a wide range of topics remained the same. By being purposeful about the literature chosen upon the return to school in September, schools were able to create a nurturing, welcoming atmosphere where children felt just as safe as ever, despite mask-wearing, distancing, and other precautions. In addition to strong classroom and building expectations, relationship building, and the teaching and reteaching of procedures, teachers, and staff were able to forge connections and create the “new normal” of school through literature. Books such as Lucy’s Mask by Lisa Sirkis Thompson and Smiling From Ear to Ear by Kaitlyn Chu helped children understand the importance of mask-wearing. If You Can’t Bear Hug, Air Hug by Katie Sedmak presented the notion of being able to connect with friends without being in close proximity to give a hug or high five. And books like A Little Spot of Anxiety by Diane Alber offered the

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

opportunity for discussing feelings that we all were feeling during the pandemic in a way that young children could understand.

By using a variety of books with a variety of topics and themes, educators can spur

thinking and learning with every read aloud. Intentionally choosing titles that engage even the youngest students and help them understand their feelings creates validation, security, and comfort in school, even during the most difficult of times. Giving young students ownership and agency of their feelings and emotions helps them to better handle the same emotions should they arise in the future. “...Schools have an important role to play in raising healthy children by fostering not only their cognitive development but also their social and emotional development.” As educators, we are not only preparing students for their academic careers but we are preparing them for interactions and developing relationships into adulthood. Our collective goal must be to build foundational socialemotional skills and wellbeing that will last a lifetime. Building Experiences Through Books One glaring difference between the world we knew and the world we now know is the experiences with which our children are entering school. Not only are students lacking social experience and exposure, but they also are lacking prior knowledge and experience that helps them infer about the world around them. Incorporating as much literature as possible into the classroom allows for students to gain this exposure through books. As Jim Trelease ponders in his bestselling handbook on reading aloud to children, “So how do we educate the heart? There are really only two ways: life experience and stories about life experience, which is called literature. Great preachers and teachers—Aesop, Socrates, Confucius, Moses, and Jesus—have traditionally used stories to get their lesson plans across, educating both the mind and the heart.” The heart and the brain work closely together. As we all have heard and know well, “Maslow before Bloom.” We must find ways to create a nurturing environment that meets a child’s most basic needs before he can access whatever is being taught. A nurturing classroom environment must come first at the primary levels.

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

It is our responsibility in the early grades to not only provide students with

academic readiness but also to provide the social-emotional building blocks necessary for success throughout their educational careers and lives. By providing students with problem-solving skills, emotional literacy, friendship skills, and self-regulation, we are able to put young children on the right path to social-emotional wellbeing. Without the typical exposure to social experiences upon entry to school, it is more difficult for students to possess the beginnings of these skills to build upon. Many children have not been in social situations with people outside of their close circle of family and friends. By using literature early on in the school year, we are able to bridge the gaps to begin helping them understand their own feelings and the feelings of others.

Luckily, the increased awareness around the importance of teaching social-

emotional skills has led to a wide array of titles that lend themselves well to SEL lessons. Books such as Thelma the Unicorn by Aaron Blabey and Giraffes Can’t Dance by Giles Andreae help children begin to understand the importance of recognizing the feelings of others. Books such as When Sophie Gets Angry, Really, Really Angry by Molly Bang, Big Feelings by Alexandra Penfold, and The Way I Feel by Janan Cain can help children begin to understand self-regulation, calming strategies, and understanding emotions. Finally, problem-solving can be taught with books such as What Do You Do With a Problem by Kobi Yamada, Going Places by Peter and Paul Reynolds, and Beautiful Oops by Barney Saltzberg. Literature is an amazing place for the roots of empathy to begin developing and teachers of young children have so many great titles to choose from. By allowing children to explore not only the feelings they have but also those of others, books create a safe opportunity for children to listen and learn. Intentional teachers will use discussion to guide lessons that help accentuate those learning points in the books to help young children relate and connect. For children who have had little interaction with peers prior to entering school, these opportunities provide the foundation for building friendships on care and understanding. They also allow these children to understand the cooperative nature of friendships and relationships.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

Beyond a child’s four classroom walls, there lies an opportunity for even more

connection, even with social distancing and cohort guidelines in place. For instance, two classes or cohorts could read the same book and serve as “book-pals” in drawing pictures of their favorite parts to send to one another. Even though pandemic learning has had its difficulties, particularly with building relationships, friendships, and connections, the creativity of educators shines when having to overcome a challenge such as this. There certainly are ways to engage children with their peers, even in difficult circumstances. Overcoming Pandemic-Related Anxiety

At times, children have anxious feelings regarding the unknown. The pandemic

provided a breeding ground for children and their families alike to have feelings of anxiety about things that were out of their control. Some children may not be able to name their emotions or vocalize what is making them feel a certain way. Experiencing feelings that they don’t understand can be nerve-wracking for young children, as can witnessing others experiencing such emotions. Naming feelings, using stories to teach, and allowing students the opportunity and necessary prompting to vocalize how they feel foster a sense of belonging and safety in the classroom. Using literacy to build a child’s emotional literacy helps them to better make connections and understand situations they encounter in their lives.

As mentioned previously in this article, there are numerous reasons for anxiety in

children as we come out of the pandemic together. The Good Egg by Jory John and Pete Oswald, There Might Be Lobsters by Carolyn Crimi, as well as Jabari Jumps by Gaia Cornwall, offer children the opportunity to listen to stories about the anxiety of others. Books help us to normalize feelings of anxiety and worry in children and, in turn, help them to feel less alone in the way they are feeling. In the instance of Jabari Jumps, a character dealing with a non-threatening problem like being brave enough to jump off a diving board, allows children to listen to the character’s experience with the feeling of anxiousness and apply strategies to other situations he might encounter. A teacher can do much with a story like this one, as it lends itself well to refer to the main character

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

during parts of the day that might cause anxious feelings in some students. Jabari’s tale becomes a common experience that all students can understand references to as they are made during the school day.

For some families, the thought of children returning to in-person school was

anxiety-inducing. In some instances, those feelings of anxiety can transfer over to our children, even when well-meaning adults do not intend for that to happen. Children take their cues from the adults in their lives. Children may have fears regarding health and safety at school. Luckily, teachers have the opportunity to use literature to ease fears and make safety procedures seem commonplace. Exploring topics like hand washing and germs through children’s books enables children to see these concepts as less threatening. In some cases, early childhood teachers might have the benefit of having a school nurse or other health professional available to read to the class and discuss the concept of staying healthy and safe in a developmentally appropriate way. In some instances, teachers may even be able to use such an opportunity for co-teaching lessons. In addition, school adjustment counselors, school psychologists, and other mental health professionals offer the same opportunity for lessons on social-emotional wellbeing in the classroom. Building Relationships and Connections

The most fundamental building block for success for any classroom at any level is

solid relationship building between students, staff, and families. Those relationships must be solid amongst all three of those groups: students and staff, staff and families, students and families; but also within those groups: students and students, staff and staff, families and families. These strong relationships help build a sense of community and belonging that is vital for emotional wellbeing in the school community. When one group feels left out of the equation, things do not balance out. During the pandemic, it was increasingly difficult for these groups to connect in the meaningful ways that they have in the past. As we recover, it is important to take lessons learned from the way things were done in 2020-2021 to provide support to families, students, and fellow colleagues.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

In many school communities, it became apparent that connecting with parents

through virtual chats was something that allowed for flexibility on both ends of the conversation. Parents no longer had to take a half-day off from work to attend a 15-minute parent-teacher conference. Virtual sessions for parents during the closure allowed us to bring families together to discuss the challenges of staying home with young children and trying to keep them invested in online learning. Parents suddenly had a new connection to school that wasn’t provided prior to the closure in 2020. Like teachers, school leaders have had to shift thinking as well. In a study of how building leaders were able to create intentionally inviting schools during the pandemic, “Although in noncrisis times, instructional leaders often encourage teachers to use Bloom’s taxonomy, in conversation with leaders in this study, they explained being concerned with Maslow rather than Bloom because they realized that families were often challenged to provide the essentials to their children in the context of COVID-19 and remote learning. Leaders also understood that they had to adapt, change, or pivot their leadership style in order to respond to the needs of their students, teachers, and families.” By offering parents the opportunity to connect with building staff and build connections without coming into the building, schools were able to foster that sense of inclusivity and participation in education.

Having participated in the majority of the school year in person, the end of the

2019-2020 school year posed challenges, but teachers had already had the opportunity to connect with their students and families. Beginning the 2020-2021 school year in hybrid or remote form was increasingly difficult in this regard. Teachers had to reinvent the way they created connections with individual students, as well as in the greater classroom community. Chrysanthemum by Kevin Henkes, Stick and Stone by Beth Ferry, and Be Kind by Pat Zietlow Miller all help teachers to build a classroom climate that supports friendship, community, and understanding and celebration of differences, even when the books are used virtually.

During unprecedented times parents of young children benefit from support

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

provided to them from schools. During the pandemic, many parents were left feeling uneasy about the impact of the pandemic on their children. Schools have the opportunity now to continue to support these families through reach-out and inclusion. Providing families with information on the benefits of reading to their children can be hugely impactful. There are endless statistics on the benefits of children who are read to on a daily basis at home. While we can provide the support and literacy exposure at school, like anything else we do, support at home helps solidify the work being done at school. Providing parents with information on social-emotional learning and tips on supporting their child’s social-emotional development at home can also be helpful. Coupling these and providing book lists, book bags, or suggestions for titles can help parents have a better sense of what books are most appropriate for supporting their child’s development.

Parents can also benefit from tips and instruction on using children’s literature to

help elicit discussions at home. School staff can provide information on the best ways to connect text to at-home conversations about change, emotions, or anxiety. Parents need to ensure that connections at home are strong so that children have a caring, trustworthy adult to bring worries or fears to and feel safe about doing so. By using reading aloud as a vehicle for this, parents create a safe adult and a safe time to talk about things that might be of concern for a child. Reading aloud regularly at home allows children a sense of comfort and connection to the adult participating with them. By incorporating titles to help foster discussion such as The Rabbit Listened by Cori Doerrfeld, When the World Stays Inside by Mikey Woz, and A Little Spot Stays Home by Diane Alber, parents can elicit thoughts and feelings that might not be shared otherwise. Books are incredible tools for creating safe zones for sharing. Sometimes parents just need inspiration and a push.

In addition, using home surveys to gather information on a child’s home life

can be helpful to teachers as they build connections with students and their families. COVID-19 related surveys can help school staff understand the impacts of the pandemic on a family. Literacy-based surveys can help school staff understand what areas of parent support might be helpful to provide. Information on a family’s access to literature might

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

be telling in terms of whether or not it would be helpful to provide books to a family. In some school communities, parents enjoy having the opportunity to connect and interact with one another. Holding a virtual or in-person event where parents can learn about read-aloud strategies and benefits can be a useful tool as well. While we cannot always be certain that our families will participate in these attempts at a home-school connection, it is absolutely worth the effort. Examining Equity and Fairness

As we bring students back to our new normal, we must continue to examine issues

related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Inequities around race, social class, religion, gender, sexuality, disability, and other areas cannot be ignored. Creating an inclusive classroom that promotes awareness of diversity and cultures is part of creating a safe, nurturing environment for all students. Using literature is one way to help raise awareness of diversity and create a culture of inclusion and acceptance as we strive to make children of all backgrounds, cultures, and races feel like valued members of the classroom and school communities.

It is important to consider the environmental factors that go into creating a

nurturing learning environment for young children. Children’s literature in a nurturing early childhood environment should always reflect diverse populations. “Children should see the rich diversity of their lives and the lives of those around them in the books they read every day. However, with the overall lack of diversity in children’s literature, the responsibility falls on teachers to make conscious decisions about appropriate books for the classroom...All children deserve exposure to a wide range of books which include characters who are both similar and different from themselves.” Not only should students from all backgrounds feel represented by classroom literature but every single student should be learning through exposure to diversity, equity, and inclusion in the literature being shared.

There are a variety of books that help us examine issues of diversity, equity, and

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

inclusion as we attempt to build classrooms where children can develop socially and emotionally. In addition to looking at books that specifically address topics of diversity and equality and, in doing so, celebrate differences, teachers should also take into consideration their classroom library as a whole. How many different races are represented by characters in books in the classroom library? How many books show diverse family types? How many books depict characters from a variety of cultural backgrounds? How many books include characters who have disabilities? These are just some of the questions that educators should be asking as they examine their classroom libraries. In order for all students to feel accepted and for all students to grow and develop in a way that will promote inclusion and social-emotional health, these questions are vital. Books such as Whoever You Are by Mem Fox, Same Same but Different by Jenny Sue KosteckiShaw, and Say Hello by Rachel Isadora, can be useful in explicitly teaching acceptance and diversity. However, it is important for teachers to recognize the importance of diversity and representation across classroom and school libraries. It is important that diversity, equity, and inclusion be looked at from a wider lens than simply including one or two books on acceptance. We must do a comprehensive job of including all people in our children’s literature selections for students.

Diversity in our schools brings with it so many benefits for all students. Even in non-

diverse communities, creating diverse lessons and ensuring access to materials celebrating diversity benefit our children in their learning experience and teach tolerance. With so many changes coming out of the response to the pandemic, it is a great time for schools to examine their approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and continue to make strides towards advancing their efforts towards creating inclusive learning environments. Beyond the Books

Children’s literature gives us a wonderful starting off point for most conversations

that can occur in the classroom. Books allow children to think outside of themselves and transport to other places and identities. They enable children to discover thoughts, feelings, language, and experiences to which they might otherwise not be exposed,

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

particularly in our post-pandemic world. However, what must teachers do beyond the books to help support the social-emotional themes that children’s literature helps to introduce to their classroom communities?

By using texts intentionally, teachers can enhance instruction around routines,

behavior, expectations, and more. As mentioned earlier in the article, books can be used to reinforce regular classroom practices but also those specific to COVID-19 procedures. This can be particularly helpful for children who have been to school prior to the pandemic. Books create awareness and conversation around concepts that may be new to children. For both children who have not yet been to school and those with pre-pandemic school experience, teaching, reteaching, and reteaching routines and expectations is the way to ensure those routines and expectations are met. Finding a variety of books on the same subject allows for teachers to revisit concepts that have already been taught. For example, a classroom of early learners might benefit from being taught safety procedures repeatedly. Using a collection of books on the subject, such as The Recess Queen by Alexis O’Neill, David Goes to School by David Shannon, and My Mouth is a Volcano by Julia Cook, may help students identify with the characters and apply the situations from the books to their own school experiences. It allows for reteaching without monotony.

There is a wealth of research regarding the importance of classroom management

at all levels, but for the purposes of this discussion, particularly in the primary levels. “Everything a teacher does has implications for classroom management, including creating the setting, decorating the room, arranging the chairs, speaking to children and handling their responses, putting routines in place (and then executing, modifying, and reinstituting them), developing rules, and communicating those rules to the students.” By creating consistency within their classroom, teachers are able to create a climate where students feel safe in taking risks and feel successful on a regular basis. Visuals in the classroom can be a major support for this. Just like the illustrations in a text, visuals give children a quick visual connection to a concept or routine. They can be immensely helpful with our youngest students.

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

Children work best and most successfully in environments of consistency

and routine. This is especially true in times of change, such as the last year and a half. Consistency in the adults in their lives, the schedule and routines they follow, and knowing what to expect to help them feel secure in the world around them. It can be common for young children to crave control in a world that gives them little. By offering small choices and giving a young child power over a portion of his environment, that child can often be successful in following routines. During the pandemic, adults too can often feel out of control. This can be a difficult feeling for many of us. It is important to validate a child’s feelings but to also help them in understanding that these feelings don’t last forever and working on coping strategies to help us through them. Where Do We Go Now?

As schools continue on through unprecedented times, it is imperative that social-

emotional wellbeing for students, staff, and families is at the forefront of the education world. In finding ways to move forward together, members of school communities can help support one another. Relationships can be built from the first moment a student steps into the classroom and teachers should seize the opportunity to start school on the strongest foot. Literature can be a worthwhile vehicle for making connections, building relationships, sharing feelings, and so much more.

Children are incredibly resilient. They can also be thoughtful and reflective,

especially when given the prompting and adult support to consider specific situations or thoughts. It is very important that school staff prepare themselves to have these important conversations and provide these opportunities for our young children to continue to succeed, develop, and grow in our classrooms. By keeping mental health and socialemotional learning at the forefront, we will create students who are then ready to tackle academic challenges and rise to meet our expectations. Difficult situations, when handled well, often breed the innate ability to rise to challenges, handle stress, and grow stronger. With well-equipped school staff and parents ready to support our students, they will continue to make progress.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

To properly utilize children’s literature to help enhance social-emotional learning

with trade books, teachers must be intentional and thoughtful in their planning. School leaders, librarians, and literacy specialists can assist teachers in their planning by making more trade books with social-emotional themes available in schools. By having more resources at their fingertips, teachers are then able to expand their skills in adapting lessons to incorporate social-emotional learning. This helps to create safe, nurturing classroom environments and build positive relationships that allow students to feel comfortable exploring their feelings and emotions. When school communities work together for the social-emotional wellbeing of students, everyone wins.

References Araújo, L. A., Veloso, C. F., Souza, M. C., Azevedo, J., & Tarro, G. (2021). The potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on child growth and development: a systematic review. Journal of Pediatrics, 97(4), 369–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jped.2020.08.008 Brion, C. (2021). Creating Intentionally Inviting School Cultures during Crisis. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 10(1), 160–181. Retrieved from https://www.ojed.org/index.php/jise/article/ view/2585 Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of ENHANCING Students’ social and Emotional Learning: A meta-analysis of School-Based UNIVERSAL Interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14678624.2010.01564.x Kalb, G., & van Ours, J. C. (2014). Reading to young children: A head-start in life? Economics of Education Review, 40, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2014.01.002 Leahy, M. A., & Foley, B. C. (2018). Diversity in children’s literature. World Journal of Educational Research, 5(2), 172. https://doi.org/10.22158/wjer.v5n2p172 Sieberer-Nagler, K. (2015). Effective classroom-management & positive teaching. English Language Teaching, 9(1), 163. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n1p163 Trelease, J. (2001). The read-aloud handbook. Penguin Books. Weissberg, R. P. (2019). Promoting the social and emotional learning of millions of school children. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(1), 65–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691618817756

There’s a Book For That!: Using Literacy for Social-Emotional Connection in the Post-Pandemic Early Childhood Classroom

Are you looking for phonics resources that are aligned with the Science of Reading and Structured Literacy?

Add our phonics supplemental programs to strengthen your existing ELA curriculum.

Full-year, whole class phonics strand to supplement your Tier 1 program with 20 minutes of daily phonics

95 Phonics Core Program™, K-3 Classrooom Kits

Summer School phonics taught for 20 minutes daily

30-day instruction focusing on short vowels in CVC words for 20 minutes daily

95 Phonics Booster Bundle™: Summer School Edition, Rising 1-3

INTRODUCING 95 Phonics Skill Series™: Short Vowels

Download program overviews, lesson samples, and more at 95pg.info/phonics-solutions.

For more information contact: Stacey Miller, PhD, Regional Account Executive smiller@95percentgroup.com | (847) 499-8229 | www.95percentgroup.com

Massachusetts Reading Association Primer December 2021 vol. 49. No.2

Book Review: We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, by Bettina L. Love Jonathan A. Harlow Student Support/Special Education Teacher Boston Preparatory Charter School, Hyde Park, Massachusetts. We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, Written by Bettina L. Love Beacon Press (February 2020) 200 Pages, $12.69 paperback, ISBN-13 : 978-0807028346

We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of

Educational Freedom stresses the importance of self-evaluation of teachers who work with black and brown students and our individual accountability for maintaining the “Educational Survival Complex” (27). Raised in Rochester, New York, Dr. Love recounts her student experience and metamorphosis after leaving parochial school and attending a public high school with black educators and administrators that celebrated both her and her experience as a young black woman in a predominantly black school. Dr. Love, a teacher educator at the University of Georgia and former educator in Homestead, Florida, argues that for those of us who work in largely black communities, it is not sufficient to merely love our students. We must commit ourselves to become abolitionist teachers and work in collaboration to eliminate the Educational Survival Complex and speak out against all forms of discrimination in the black, Latinx, trans, queer or Asian communities.

In chapter 2, Love delves into the necessary discussion of the economics of

Book Review: We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, by Bettina L. Love

teaching and affirms what many of us in the field have known for years: the greatest challenge to public education is existing and generational poverty created by racist policies intended to diminish minority wealth and power. The author emphasizes that without a fundamental change in racist economic policies, innovations in pedagogy will yield limited results. “Education researchers know that without a long-term strategy to eradicate the causes of racial economic isolation, heroic attempts to restructure schools or introduce new pedagogical techniques in the classroom will be difficult to sustain” (19). However, the author does not concede this in terms of defeat. It is a clarion call that the introduction of anti-racist pedagogy in concert with grassroots efforts to pass policy reforms aimed at equitable redistribution will bring about meaningful change in isolated communities. After framing the social and emotional trauma inflicted on communities of color for centuries, Dr. Love astutely addresses the myth of teaching grit and zeal to students.

We Want to Do More Than Survive shrewdly disrupts the importance and inherent

bias in teaching grit to our students. Zeal and determination are important values that can be fostered. However, to communities facing unprecedented income inequality, diminishing job prospects offering little aspirational value, and ever-rising costs for higher education impossibly out of reach to people denied generational wealth due to institutional racist policies is nothing short of cruel. “Our students are now taught with the world crumbling around them to pay their taxes, vote, volunteer, and have good character, which is code for comply, comply, comply” (70). As a history teacher in an antiracist school, I would argue that it is crucial to teach my students how to confront unjust policies intended to diminish the rights of minority groups rather than emphasizing character-building pedagogy.

Massachusetts Reading Association | massreading.org | massreading@comcast.net

As Love explains in Chapter 5, Abolitionist teaching is possible with what she refers

to as “Freedom Dreaming” (101). “Arguably, abolitionists’ greatest tools against injustice were their imagination” (102). Freedom Dreaming is a rejection of what we have come to accept as normative in school districts across the country. The clarion call to abolitionist teaching is a rejection of the idea that “black children are held accountable for the failures of the public school system” (102). Accepting what has become normalized in our urban and rural schools is not going to elevate the lives of any disenfranchised group. Those of us in the classroom have a responsibility to identify and speak to the injustices we see in our schools and districts.

Dr. Love’s book provides crucial insight regarding antiracist pedagogy and social

justice teaching. It has been 67 years since Brown v. The Board of Education struck down the peculiar American institution of “separate but equal”. We Want to Do More Than Survive is a prudent reminder that we have not achieved equality in our communities or our school systems. While school choice has offered alternatives to our failing public school systems, public charters sometimes lack the unbiased ingredients to help our students thrive. Implementation of subliminally racist practices intended to distract black children and families from racist economic and legislative policies barring black people from equality is an exercise in the diversion. Black students do not need lessons in character. They need schools and institutions that transparently address the inequities that have been permitted to exist and the final dismantling of the “Educational Survival Complex”. We Want to Do More Than Survive is a resource I refer to regularly as I refine my practice as an abolitionist teacher in Boston.

Book Review: We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, by Bettina L. Love

Thank you to MRA Sponsors!